[Par-new] A GUIDE FOR MAGID - Part Three
Menachem Leibtag
tsc at bezeqint.net
Wed Apr 8 07:08:19 EDT 2009
**********************************************************
***************
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER www.tanach.org
In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag
**********************************************************
***************
A GUIDE FOR MAGGID - Part Three
[revised 5769]
Should Passover be understood as our 'holiday of
freedom' - a special time set aside to thank God for
taking us out of slavery?
Certainly, the popular song of "avadim hayinu... ata benei
chorin" ['We were once slaves, but now we are free'] -
seems to state exactly that point.
However, when you read your Haggada carefully,
you'll notice that those words never appear (in that
combination). And if you study the Haggada, you'll notice
that it states quite the opposite, i.e. that we remain
'servants', but we simply have a new 'boss'!
So why do we recite "avadim hayinu"?
In the following shiur (Part Three of our series in on
MAGID), as we study MAGID section by section, we will show
how that paragraph, and many others like it, take on
special meaning when we consider the psukim in Chumash
that they are based on.
[Attached to the shiur is a pdf file with many of the
mekorot that we will be discussing. It is very important
to look up and study all the sources that we quote;
otherwise, it will be difficult to follow our
explanations]
Some of this study may appear a bit tedious, but if you
study those sources carefully, hopefully it will help make
your Seder a little more interesting.
THE MISHNA in Mesechet PESACHIM
The Mishna in the tenth chapter of Mesechet
Pesachim sets some guidelines concerning how to fulfill
this obligation 'to tell the story', including one that
deals with its format:
"matchilim bi-gnut u-mesaymim be-shevach" -
- We begin our story with a derogatory comment, and
conclude it with praise.
In the Gemara's subsequent discussion (see Pesachim 116a),
we find two opinions concerning what this opening comment
should be:
* Rav - "Mi-tchila ovdei avoda zara..." - At
first. our ancestors were idol worshipers..."
* Shmuel - "Avadim hayinu..." - We were once
slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt..."
At the simplest level, it seems that Rav & Shmuel
argue concerning what is considered a more derogatory
statement- i.e. the fact that we were once slaves, or the
fact that we once idol worshipers. However, this dispute
may also relate to a more fundamental question -
concerning where the story of Yetziat Mitzrayim actually
begins - from our slavery in Egypt (Shmuel), or from the
time of our forefathers (Rav).
In our previous shiur, we explained how we
actually quote both of these opinions in our Haggada, but
not as the starting point of the story. Rather they serve
as important statements of purpose, while the story itself
doesn't begin until we recite "arami oved avi".
[See Rambam Hilchot chametz u'matza 7:4 - read his closing
remarks carefully, and you'll see that he makes exactly
this point - that "arami oved avi" follows the format of
matchilin b'gnut u'msayem b'shvach - and hence we follow
this format when we recite "arami oved avi"!
Based on this Rambam, one could also suggest that Rav &
Shmuel are only bringing proofs (or examples) from Tanach
of this format (see Yehoshua 24:1-12 and Devarim 6:20-25
to support this), but do not claim that these are the
words that we need to recite when we tell the story. ]
With this in mind, we return to a detailed study
MAGGID, to discuss certain points that were not covered in
the previous shiurim.
'HA LACHMA ANYA'
As we explained earlier, the opening paragraph of
MAGGID - 'ha lachma anya...' does not begin the story of
Yetziat Mitzrayim; but rather it serves as a beautiful
segue between "YACHATZ" and MAGID. Let's explain why, by
considering the psukim in Chumash that it alludes to:
In YACHATZ, the leader of the Seder breaks the
matza and then, while showing this broken piece to
everyone who has gathered, he explains:
"ha LACHMA ANYA - This is the 'bread of affliction' that
our forefathers ate in Egypt."
Check the various translations of the phase "lachma anya"
and you will usually find one of two translations:
1) bread of affliction [as in "inuii" - affliction]
(see Breishit 15:13, Shmot 3:7 & 3:17)
Or 2) poor-man's bread [as in an "ani" - a poor person]
(see Shmot 22:24, Vayira 19:9-10)
The source for this phrase is obviously based on the laws
of Korban Pesach in Parshat Re'ay:
"Observe the spring month and offer a Pesach for God.
For seven days, eat 'upon it' matza - 'lechem oni' - ki
b'chipazon yazata m'Mitzraim - [translation unclear]
(see Devarim 16:1-3)
Rashi explains that "lechem oni" is not describing what
the bread is, but rather what the bread represents:
"lechem oni" - the bread that reminds us of our affliction
[See Rashi and Ibn Ezra on 16:3 - note also how Seforno
and Chizkuni disagree, claiming that 'lechem oni' explains
what matza is - the bread of a poor. However, by comparing
Devarim 16:3 to Shmot 13:3-8, it's obvious that Rashi and
Ibn Ezra are correct.]
But even before Bnei Yisrael left Egypt, there
was another commandment to eat matza - together with the
Korban Pesach!
So what does this "lachma anya" refer to:
The matza that we ate as slaves in Egypt;
The matza that we ate with the first Korban
Pesach; or
The matza that we ate when we left Egypt in
a rush -
To answer this question, let's take a look at how
this paragraph continues:
The next statement (right after 'ha lachma anya') - at
first sounds like an invitation:
"Anyone who is hungry, let him come and eat, anyone who is
in need, let him come and join in the Pesach, this year
'here', next year in the Land of Israel; this year -
slaves, next year - free men"
This statement can be understood in one of two ways,
either:
* an open invitation for others to join us. - or
* a quote of what our forefathers once said to
one another in Egypt.
These two possibilities depend on how one understands the
word "v'yifsach" in the phrase "kol ditzrich yete
v'yifsach" [anyone who needs, let him come and join our
Pesach].
If we take the word "va'yifsach" literally, then this must
be an invitation to join in the korban Pesach - and hence,
it must be a quote from an earlier time period.
If "va'yifsach" is not translated literally (and hence
refers to the Seder) - then this section serves as an
invitation at this time. However, this wouldn't make
much sense, for at this time at the Seder everyone is
already sitting down. Considering that we've already made
Kiddush and eaten "karpas" - isn't it a bit late to be
inviting people!
Let's return therefore to the possibility that
"va'yifsach" refers to the actual 'korban Pesach' (which
seems to be the simple meaning of this word). If so, we
can easily pinpoint exactly who we are quoting - by
finding a time period when people invited one another to
join in korban Pesach; but also when we were not yet
living in Israel, and still in slavery!
There aren't too many possibilities, as this can only be a
quote of what our forefathers said to one another in
preparation for the very first korban Pesach (i.e. the one
in Egypt, as described in Shmot 12:1-23), for that was the
only time in Jewish history when the korban Pesach was
offered when we were both:
(1) in slavery (hoping next year to be free) - and
(2) living outside the Land of Israel (hoping be next year
in the Land of Israel)!
If this interpretation is correct, then the flow of topic
makes perfect sense. We break the matza, and explain that
this is the same type of bread that our forefathers ate
when they gathered to eat the very first korban Pesach -
back in Egypt! Then we quote what they said to one
another in preparation for that special evening - inviting
one another to that meal (see Shmot 12:3-8), and
expressing the hope that by next year they will be in free
(see 12:12-13), and living in the land of Israel (see
Shmot 3:6-8 and 3:16-17).
This quote of our forefathers, from the very first Seder
in Jewish History, is quite meaningful - for we begin
MAGGID by emphasizing the connection between our own Seder
and the very first Seder that Am Yisrael kept thousands of
years ago (and its purpose). By quoting from the special
atmosphere of that very first Passover family gathering,
we highlight the continuity of our tradition and our hope
for the fulfillment of its goals.
MAH NISHTANA
Even though this section is often referred to as 'The Four
Questions', there is really only one question; i.e. - 'Why
is this night different'? Because we have done so many
things to catch his attention, the child obviously
realizes something special is happening. Therefore, after
asking 'the one question'; he brings four examples/proofs
to support his claim that tonight is indeed different.
It is for this reason that we never answer these
'four questions'; Rather, Maggid continues with the answer
to the 'one question' - of why this night is special.
[This section is based not only on the Mishnayot in the
Tenth perek of Mesechet Pesachim, but also on the source
pasuk for Magid - "ve-higgadeta le-BINCHA" - and you must
tell your children on that day... (see Shmot 13:8).
Therefore, we must catch our children's attention so that
they will listen to the story.]
The Haggada's answer to this question begins with the
phrase 'AVADIM HAYINU'; yet this phrase as well is based
on a very important pasuk in Parshat V'etchanan. To
appreciate this quote, we must first discuss its location
in Sefer Devarim.
AVADIM HAYINU & SEFER DEVARIM
To appreciate why MAGGID quotes specifically this
pasuk of 'avadim hayinu' to begin its discussion of our
obligation to tell the story of the Exodus, we must study
its source (and context) in Sefer Devarim.
Recall from our study of Sefer Devarim how Moshe
Rabeinu delivers a lengthy speech (chapters 5 thru 26), in
which he reviews the numerous laws that Bnei Yisrael must
observe once they enter the land (see Devarim 5:1, 5:28,
6:1 etc.). As part of his introductory remarks concerning
those mitzvot - Moshe states as follows:
"Should [or when] your child will ask - What [obligates
us] to keep these laws and statutes and commandments that
God our Lord has commanded? -
And you shall tell him - AVADIM HAYINU le-Pharaoh
be-Mitzrayim... - We were once slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt,
but God brought us out with a mighty hand..."
(See Devarim 6:20-21, and its context.)
In other words, Sefer Devarim used the phrase
'avadim hayinu' to introduce its explanation for why Bnei
Yisrael are obligated to keep ALL of the mitzvot.
But when we continue to read that explanation in
Sefer Devarim, we find the reason WHY God took them out:
"ve-otanu hotzi mi-sham, lema'an havi otanu el
ha-aretz..."
And God took us out in order to bring us to the Land that
He swore unto our fathers [='brit avot].
And the LORD commanded us to do all these laws, to fear
the LORD our God, for our good...
And it shall be the just thing to do, if we observe to do
all these commandments before the LORD our God, as He hath
commanded us." [See Devarim 6:22-25.]
Here again, we find that the Torah states
explicitly that God took us out of Egypt for a purpose -
i.e. in order to inherit the Land and to serve God by
keeping His laws.
This statement supports Rashi & Ibn Ezra's
interpretation of the pasuk 'ba'avur zeh...' (as we
discussed in Part One), that we are to explain to our
children that God took us out of (and put us into) Egypt,
in order that we keep His mitzvot.
Therefore, it is very meaningful that the Haggada
chose specifically this pasuk of 'avadim hayinu' to
introduce its discussion of WHY we are obligated to tell
the story of Yetziat Mitzrayim on this special evening.
In fact, one could suggest that this may have been
the underlying reasoning behind Shmuel's opinion (in
Pesachim 116a). By stating that we begin the story with
the pasuk of 'avadim hayinu', Shmuel is simply stating
that before we tell the story, we must explain the reason
for this obligation - just as we do in MAGGID!
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE STORY
As we explained earliler, this paragraph that
begins with AVADIIM HAYINU does NOT begin the story of
Yetziat Mitzrayim. Instead, it makes two very important
statements, which provide the answer to the 'one question'
of WHY this night is so special. Hence we explain:
* WHY we are obligated to tell this story - for had it
not been for this story of how God saved us from Egypt, we
would still be slaves till this day;
And, then we explain:
* WHO is obligated to tell this story - i.e. 've-afilu
kulanu chachamim..' - and even if we [who gather] are all
very wise and learned and know the entire Torah, it
remains incumbent upon us to tell that story; and the more
we elaborate upon it, the better!
MA'ASEH BE-R. ELIEZER...
To prove this second point of the 'avadim hayinu'
paragraph (that even ' know it alls' are obligated to tell
the story), the next paragraph in MAGGID quotes a story of
five great Torah scholars (in fact Tannaim) who gathered
for the Seder in Bnei Brak. Even though they certainly
knew the story; nonetheless they spent the entire evening
(until dawn the next morning) discussing it.
[This reflects a classic format for a Rabbinic statement.
First the Rabbis state the obligation [in our case, that
everyone is obligated to tell the story - even 'know it
alls'] - afterward they support that ruling by quoting a
story [in our case, the story of the five scholars who
spent the entire evening discussing the story of the
Exodus, even though they surely knew it.]
It is also interesting to note how this story
concludes when their students reminded them that it was so
late - that it was already time to read morning "kriyat
shema". Based on our above study of Sefer Devarim, this
should not surprise us - for the section of Chumash that
"avadim hayinu" is quoted from (and refers to), begins
with the SHEMA (see Devarim 6:4 thru 6:23)!
Even though the Haggada does not quote all the
conversations between these wise men that evening, the
next paragraph does quote one specific discussion. Let's
explain why:
AMAR RABBI ELIEZER BEN AZARYA...
The specific discussion that we quote concerns the
Biblical source for our daily obligation to 'mention' the
story of the Exodus (see Devarim 16:3). In Hebrew, this
obligation is commonly referred to as "zechira" [to
passively remember], in contrast to our 'once a year'
obligation at the Seder of "sippur" - to actively tell the
story of the Exodus.
Most likely, the Haggada chose to quote this specific
discussion as it relates to the obvious connection between
these two mitzvot ("zechira" & "sippur").
One could suggest that the story we tell at the Seder
("sippur") serves as the reference point for our daily
mention ("zechira") of the Exodus - when we recite the
third 'parshia' of keriyat shema (see Bamidbar 15:41),
every morning and evening. To mention this story on a
daily basis only becomes meaningful if we first 'tell the
story' in full (at least once a year).
We should note as well that the very pasuk: "I am the Lord
your God who took you out of the Land of Egypt to be for
you a God" (Bamidbar 15:41) supports the opinion of Rashi
& Ibn Ezra (see their commentary to Shmot 13:8) that we
must explain to our children that God took us out of Egypt
in order that we keep His commandments (like eating
matza).
See also the last several psukim of Tehillim 105, noting
the word "baavur" in its concluding verse. Notice as well
the mention of the Ten Plagues in that chapter, noting how
there mentioned as part of a review of how God kept His
promise of "brit bein ha'btarim" to the Avot, by taking us
out of Egypt.
THE FOUR SONS
This section reflects the statement in the Mishna: '"l'fi
da'ato shel ha-ben, aviv melamdo" - based on the level of
the child, the parent should teach [the story]. [See
Pesachim 116a.]
Based on this dictum, the Haggada quotes a Mechilta, which
offers four examples of how to tell the story to different
types of children - each example based on a pasuk in
Chumash (where the father answers his son).
The opening statement of this section: 'baruch
ha-Makom...' serves as a 'mini' "birkat ha-Torah" [a
blessing recited before Torah study], as we are about to
engage in the study of a Mechilta - the Midrash on Sefer
Shmot. The quote itself begins with "keneged arba banim
dibra Torah..."
As this explanation of this section is so lengthy,
we have included a 'mini shiur' on this topic, which can
be found as an Appendix and the end of this shiur:
"YACHOL ME-ROSH CHODESH"
In the next section, beginning with: 'yachol
me-rosh chodesh...' we discuss yet another aspect of our
'obligation to tell the story' - this time concerning WHEN
we are obligated. Here, the Haggada quotes an analytical
discourse which arrives at the conclusion that the story
must be told on evening of the Seder.
The logic behind this discourse, as usual, is based on
psukim in Sefer Shmot. : Because the Torah's first command
to remember this day is recorded in Shmot 12:14, as part
of a set of commandments given to Moshe on Rosh Chodesh
Nisan (see 12:1-2), one might think that the phrase
"v'haya ha'yom ha'zeh l'zikaron" (in 12:14) refers to Rosh
Chodesh [that's the "hava amina"].
Furthermore, when Moshe relays these laws to Bnei Yisrael
in chapter 13, he also reminds them that they are leaving
Egypt in the 'month of the spring (see 13:4-5).
Nevertheless, he then informs that they must remember this
day that they left Egypt by not eating chametz & by eating
only matza for seven days (see 13:3-7).
In that context, Moshe then commands them that they must
tell the story to their children on that day "ba'yom
ha'hu" (see 13:8) - which implies on the day they are
eating matza(and hence not on Rosh Chodesh. However, this
pasuk does seem to imply the day time [ba'Yom ha'hu],
which may refer to the day when they first offer the
Korban on the 14th in the afternoon [based on Shmot 12:6
and hence "yachol m'b'od yom..."].
The drasha then rejects that possibility, understanding
based on the next phrase in 13:8 - "ba'avur zeh" - where
"zeh" in its context must be referring to the matza AND
the Korban Pesach (based on Rashi's understanding of
"avodat ha'zot" in 13:5)- hence the story must be told at
the same time that we eat matza with the korban Pesach,
i.e. on the evening of the 15th.]
"MI-TCHILA OVDEI AVODA ZARA..."
After defining the various aspects of our
obligation, MAGGID introduces the story with the paragraph
that begins with "mi-tchila ovdei avoda zara..." (possibly
following Rav's opinion in Pesachim 116a).
Even this section may give the impression that the story
starts here, if you read this paragraph carefully, you'll
notice it isn't a story at all. Instead, the Haggada is
making a very important statement, and then proves that
statement with a text-proof from Yehoshua chapter 24.
As you'd expect by now, to appreciate what's
really going on, we'll need to study that quote in its
context. Let's begin by taking a closer look at this
statement - and its proof-text.
The Statement:
"Mi-tchila ovdei avoda zara.hayu.avoteinu, ve-achshav
kirvanu ha-Makom le-avodato"
At first, our forefathers were servants to strange gods -
but now, God has brought us closer to Him - [in order] to
serve Him!
The Proof:
"And Yehoshua said to the people: 'Thus says the LORD, the
God of Israel: Your fathers dwelt in the past - beyond the
River, even Terach - the father of Avraham, and the father
of Nachor - and they served other gods.
And I took your father Avraham from beyond the River, and
led him throughout all the land of Canaan, and multiplied
his seed, and gave him Yitzchak.
And I gave unto Yitchak Yaakov and Esav; and I gave Esav
mount Seir, to possess it; and Yaakov and his children
went down into Egypt" (Yehoshua 24:2-4).
This statement should not surprise us, for once
again we find the Haggada emphasizing the point (discussed
in Part One) that God chose the people of Israel for a
purpose - i.e. to serve Him!
However, if you study the quoted text-proof, you'll notice
that it only proves the first half of our statement, i.e.
that we were once idol worshipers, but it doesn't proves
the second half - that God brought us close in order to
serve Him.
The solution to this problem is very simple. To show how
this quote from Yehoshua proves the second point as well,
we simply need to read the continuation of Yehoshua
chapter 24.
RE-AFFIRMING BRIT SINAI in Sefer Yehoshua
Review 24:1- 25, noting how it divides into two sections:
24:1-13 (a history lesson), and 24:14-25 (a covenant).
Our proof text (24:2-4) is only the opening line of
Yehoshua's 'history lesson' that he delivers to the nation
gathered in Shchem, before challenging them with an
'option' whether or not to accept God's covenant:
"Now - fear the LORD, and serve Him in sincerity and in
truth; and put away the gods which your fathers served
beyond the River, and in Egypt; and serve ye the LORD.
And if it seems to a bad idea to serve the LORD, then
choose this day whom you will serve; whether the gods
which your fathers served that were beyond the River, or
the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell; but as
for me and my house, we will serve the LORD" (Yehoshua
24:14-15).
The entire reason why Yehoshua gathered the people
in Shchem and reviewed their history was in order to
challenge them with this goal - i.e. their willingness to
truly serve God. After all, as Yehoshua explains, it was
for this very reason that God chose Avraham Avinu. Thus
the proof on the second half of the opening statement
[that God chose Avraham to SERVE Him] is derived from the
continuation of that chapter!
Note as well how the chapter continues,
emphasizing over and over again this same theme:
"And the people answered: 'Far be it from us that we
should forsake the LORD, to serve other gods; for the LORD
our God, He it is that brought us and our fathers up out
of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and that
did those great signs in our sight...
therefore we also will serve the LORD; for He is our God.'
And Yehoshua said unto the people: 'You cannot serve the
LORD; for He is a holy God; He is a jealous God; He will
not forgive your transgression nor your sins....
And the people said: 'Nay; but we will serve the LORD.'
And Joshua said unto the people: 'You are witnesses that
you have chosen God to serve Him. - And they said: 'We are
witnesses.'--
And the people said unto Yehoshua: 'The LORD our God will
we serve, and unto His voice will we hearken.'
So Yehoshua made a covenant with the people that day, and
set them a statute and an ordinance in Shechem."
[See Yehoshua
24:16-25!]
Hence, the proof for the entire statement of
'mi-tchila...' is found in the continuation of Yehoshua
chapter 24. Most probably, when this section was first
composed, the Haggada assumed that its readers were well
versed in Tanach, and knew the continuation of that
chapter.
[Note as well how psukim that we do quote from Yehoshua
(see 24:2-4) form a beautiful summary of Sefer Breishit,
as they focus on the key stages of the 'bechira' process.
Should you be looking for something novel to do at your
Seder, you could have the participants read from this
section. Note as well that Yehoshua 24:5-7 is an
excellent (albeit short) review of the story of Yetziat
Mitzrayim. ]
This background can help us appreciate how this
statement of 'mi-tchila' sets the stage for the story that
we are about to tell - for it explains why God originally
chose Avraham - i.e. to become the forefather of a nation
that will serve Him. The next paragraph of MAGGID will
explain its connection to the story that we are about to
begin.
"BARUCH SHOMER HAVTACHATO"
In the next paragraph we find yet another
'statement' (and not a story) followed by a proof-text,
that relates once again to God's original choice of our
forefathers. We will now show how this section explains
why the story must begin with Avraham.
Statement:
"Baruch shomer havtachato... - Blessed is He who keeps His
promise [of redemption] to Am Yisrael, for God had
calculated the end [time for redemption] as He had
promised Avraham Avinu at brit bein ha-btarim. As God
stated:
Proof:
'Know very well that your offspring will be strangers in a
foreign land which will oppress and enslave them for four
hundred years. But that nation who will oppress them I
will judge, and afterward they will go out with great
wealth"
[See
Breishit 15:13-18].
In this statement, we thank God for keeping His promise to
Avraham Avinu, at "brit bein ha-btarim", to ultimately
redeem Bnei Yisrael from their affliction, after some four
hundred years.
At first glance, this statement sounds like yet another
expression of gratitude. However, when considering its
position in Maggid, one could suggest a very different
reason for its mention specifically at this point.
Recall how the previous paragraph explained that God had
chosen our forefathers to establish a nation to serve Him.
In order to become that nation, God entered into a
covenant with Avraham Avinu - i.e. "brit bein ha'btarim" -
which forecasted the need for Avraham's offspring to first
undergo suffrage in 'a land not theirs' in order to become
that nation.
In other words, this historical process of slavery,
followed by a miraculous redemption, was to serve as a
'training experience' that would facilitate the formation
of that nation. [See concept of "kur ha'barzel" and its
context in Devarim 4:20.]
Hence, this paragraph explains why the story of the Exodus
must begin with "brit bein ha'btarim" - for our slavery in
Egypt was not accidental, rather it was part of God's
master plan. In a certain sense, God put us into Egypt -
in order to take us out!
[This does not imply that every event that happened to Am
Yisrael was already predetermined since the time of
Avarham Avinu. Rather, this overall framework of becoming
a nation in someone else's land - followed by oppression
and servitude - then followed by redemption - was
forecasted. How exactly it would play out, who would be
the oppressor, and how intense that oppression would be-
was yet to be determined. See Rambam Hilchot Teshuva
chapters 5 & 6; see also Seforno's introduction to Sefer
Shmot as his commentary on the first chapter.]
As we thank God for fulfilling His promise to
Avraham, we are in essence thanking God for His covenant
and its very purpose, not just for taking us out of Egypt.
Therefore in this section of Maggid, before we tell the
story of WHAT happened - we must first explain WHY it
happened.
In the next paragraph, we must explain why that covenant
that God had made with Avraham Avinu - remains meaningful
for all generations (including ours):
"VE-HEE SHE-AMDA"
As we lift our cups and recite the "v'hee sh'amda"
- we declare yet another important statement, connecting
that covenant and the events of the past with today:
"ve-HEE she-amda la-avoteinu ve-LANU "
- And it is THIS [Promise that was part of the COVENANT,
i.e. brit bein ha-btarim] which stood for our fathers, AND
for us as well. For not only once [in our history] did
our enemies try to destroy us; but in EVERY generation we
are endangered, but God comes to save us [for the sake of
His covenant]."
The word "hee" in this statement obviously refers to the
promise ['havtacha'] of brit bein ha-btarim (mentioned in
the previous paragraph). This statement is so important
that our custom is to raise the cup of wine before
reciting this proclamation!
Here we explain that "brit bein ha-btarim" was not
merely a 'one-time coupon' promising one major redemption,
but rather it defined an eternal relationship between God
and His people. The events of Yetziat Mitzrayim are only
the initial stage of this everlasting relationship.
Therefore, anytime in our history, whenever we are in
distress - God will ultimately come to redeem us.
However, the reason why God redeems us is in order that we
can return to serve Him (that's why He chose us).
This provides us with a deeper understanding of why every
generation must tell-over the story of Yetziat Mitzrayim.
At the Seder, we are not simply thanking God for the
'event' but rather for the entire 'process'. Yetziat
Mitzrayim was not simply a 'one-time' act of redemption.
Rather, it was a critical stage in an on-going historical
process in which God desires that Am Yisrael become His
special nation.
As this purpose is eternal, so too is the
covenant. Therefore, we must remind ourselves that not
only is God committed to His covenant, but we too must
keep our side, and should we need redemption once again,
it will come - but we must learn from our past mistakes on
how need to ready ourselves - to be deserving (see
Tehillim 78:1-8!). After all, redemption requires
spiritual readiness. [In our shiur on Parshat Bo, we
explained how the commandment to 'get rid of our chametz'
may reflect this need to get rid of our bad behavior - to
prepare for redemption.]
This may also explain why we invite Eliyahu ha-navi, when
we begin the final section of the Haggada, where we
express our hope for our future redemption. According to
the final psukim of Sefer Mal'achi (the Haftara for
Shabbat ha-Gadol!), Eliyahu will come to help the nation
perform proper 'teshuva' - "v'heyshev lev avot al banim,
v'lev banim al avotam.." - to become worthy for
redemption.
"TZEY U-LMAD" / "ARAMI OVED AVI"
As we explained in Part Two, this is the section
where we actually tell the story - see that shiur for the
detailed explanation.
Just a few points re: some of the drashot.
Most of them are direct quotes from the story of the
Exodus in Sefer Shmot - which makes perfect sense,
as"mikra bikurim" in Sefer Devarim is a very abridged
version of that story in Sefer Shmot. Therefore, we will
focus our discussion on some of the interesting quotes
that are not from Sefer Shmot:
"va'yered Mitzraim" - "anus a pi ha'dibur"
When Yaakov and family went down to Egypt - and
STAYED there, it was not because they wanted to, but
because God told them they had to! [Not only to go down,
but also to stay there!]
This is based on Breishit 46:1-5 (read those psukim
carefully, see also Rashbam). Note as well how God's
instructions to Yaakov (to go down and stay in Egypt)
emerge as the beginning of the process of "brit bein
ha'btarim" (see Rabman on those psukim!). Hence, the
phrase "ha'dibur" in this drasha - either relates to
Breishit 46:2-3, or to Breishit 15:1 [note "v'yhi DVAR
Hashem el Avram laymor."] in light of 15:13-18.
"bmtai ma'at" - kmo shneemar - b'shivim nefesh yardu."
"Small in number, as the pasuk says, with 70 souls you
went down to Egypt, and now you are as numerous as the
stars of the Heaven"
Even thought this appears to be just an innocent quote, if
you look at the context in Devarim, you'll notice how
fitting it is for the Seder, especially in light of our
discussion in Part One re: the purpose of telling the
story.
Read carefully from Devarim 10:12 thru 11:4 -
noting the connection between these psukim and the purpose
of the story of the Exodus, paying special attention to
10:17-19.
After reading that, you won't be surprised that
Chazal chose to quote from 10:22 for this specific drasha
(in light of 10:18-19).
Notice as well the thematic connection to "brit
bein ha'btarim" - as it is in that context that we find
for the very first time the promise of offspring 'like the
stars in the sky' (see Breishit 15:5-7).
"v'rav" - kmo shneemar - rvava k'ezemach.
This lengthy quote from Yechezkel 16:6-8 (not
worth translating for young children) is part of one of
the harshest rebukes that Am Yisrael ever received. If
you'd like to feel a bit of depression (to balance out the
wine) - review this entire chapter in Yechezkel (16:1-63),
noting that the psukim we quote are about the only kind
ones in the entire chapter. In a nutshell, that chapter
describes how Bnei Yisrael had been unfaithful in their
covenant with God from the time of Yetziat Mitzraim, until
the time of Yechezkel. The main message for the Seder is
from Yechezkel 16:60-63 - be sure to read at least that.
This quote (16:6-8) in our drasha at the Seder,
hints not only to that rebuke, but also to the possibility
(and path) of future redemption, as explained by Yechezkel
in 16:60-63.
"va'yareu OTANU ha'Mitzrim" - shneemar: hava nitchakma.
Some Haggadot translate this pasuk as: The
Egyptians were bad (or did evil) to us. However, if so,
the Hebrew should be "va'yarey'u LANU" and not "OTANU" .
[To prove this, see Bamidbar 20:15-16 in its context!]
Instead, the proper translation should be - The
Egyptians MADE US THE BAD ONES - in other words, Egypt
claimed that the Jews were planning a takeover, thus
providing the Egyptians an excuse to enslave them - for
the sake of 'national security'.
As that explanation is also "pshuto shel mikra" in
Shmot 1:8-11 (read carefully), the quote in this drasha
from precisely those psukim in Shmot (1:10) is right on
the mark!
"b'yad chazaka- zo ha'dever./b'zroah netuya- zo ha'cherev"
Even thought one can find many psukim that contain
"yad chazaka" and "zroah netuya" that refer to many
different Plagues or punishments - the Haggada prefers to
relate these two phrases to "dever" & "cherev" . Most
likely the reason for this is Moshe Rabeinu's opening
threat to Pharaoh, that if he doesn't allow Bnei Yisrael
permission to go worship their God in the desert - he will
smite Egypt with "dever" & "cherev" (see Shmot 5:1-3, in
light of Shmot 3:18-19!) As this introduced the story of
the Makkot, it becomes a very logical drasha.
"mora gadol - zeh gilui shchina.."
To appreciate this one, you must read Devarim
4:32-39 in its entirety, noting how our drasha quotes only
4:34 - however, the "gilui shchina" concept is based on
4:33 & 4:36 that describe "maamad Har Sinai" - which was
the purpose of the miracles of Yetziat Mitzraim - as
alluded to in the other psukim.
We could go on and on, but I hope you got the
point. If you want to appreciate Midrashim (and not just
mumble them), you must first study the psukim that they
quote and pay attention to their context.
With that in mind, let's continue now with our
study of the rest of Magid
WHY MIKRA BIKKURIM?
It may not be by chance that Chazal chose to
incorporate a Midrash of "mikra bikkurim" - even though it
is rather cryptic - as the method through which we fulfill
our obligation of sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim. Let's explain
why.
Recall from our shiur on Parshat Ki Tavo, that
"mikra bikkurim" (see Devarim 26:1-10) serves as a yearly
proclamation whereby every individual thanks God for His
fulfillment of the final stage of brit bein ha-btarim.
[This is supported by numerous textual and thematic
parallels between the psukim of mikra bikkurim (Devarim
26:1-9), and brit bein ha-btarim (see Breishit 15:7-18).
Note as well the use of the word 'yerusha' in 26:1 and in
15:1-8!]
This proclamation constitutes much more than
simply thanking God for our 'first fruits'. Rather, it
thanks God for the Land (see Devarim 26:3) that He had
promised our forefathers (in brit bein ha-btarim / see
Breishit 15:18). The 'first fruits' are presented as a
'token of our appreciation' for the fact that God has
fulfilled His side of the covenant - as each individual
must now declare that he will be faithful to his side of
the covenant.
As mikra bikkurim constitutes a biblical 'nusach'
['formula'] through which one thanks God for His
fulfillment of brit bein ha-btarim, one could suggest that
it was for this reason that the Mishna chose these same
psukim as its framework for telling the story of Yetziat
Mitzrayim.
It very well may be that this custom to tell the story at
the Sefer with "mikra bikurim" began after the destruction
of the Temple (note that the Tosefta of Mesechet Pesachim
does not include this custom, while the Mishna (compiled
later) does include it! Without the Temple, the
individual could no longer recite "mikra bikkurim".
However, we can at least remind ourselves of this yearly
need to proclaim our allegiance to God's covenant - by
quoting from "mikra bikurim" at the Seder!
This may explain why the Haggada only quotes the first
four psukim of mikra bikkurim (where it talks about
Yetziat Mizraim) but not the pasuk that describes how He
bought us into the Promised Land.
Finally, note also the word 'higgadeti' in Devarim 26:3
and compare it with the word 've-higgadeta' in Shmot 13:8!
THE TEN PLAGUES
In the drasha of Arami Oved Avi, notice how we quote
Devarim 26:8 twice, each time trying to understand why the
pasuk describes how God took us out of Egypt in FIVE
different ways:
b'yad chazaka, b'zroah ntuya, etc.
The first drasha assumes that each of these five words
refers to something specific, and proves it by finding
that same word in the story of the Exodus. The second
drasha, makes a very different assumption, that each of
these five words refers to two plagues (as some are two
words, while others are in plural - e.g. "otot u'moftim")
- hence the conclusion that this entire pasuk is alluding
to the Ten Plagues [5x2=10].
At this point, the Haggada quotes an additional drasha -
by R. Yossi ha-Glili - that there must have been 5 times
as many plagues at the Red Sea than were in Egypt - based
on a textual comparison between Shmot 8:15 ["etzba" -
finger) and 14:31 ("yad"= hand). Based on the ratio
between - 'etzba' of the Makkot to 'yad' at Kriyat Yam
Suf (i.e. hand/finger = 5/1) - we conclude that there were
50 plagues at Yam Suf.
FROM 50 to 250 based on Tehillim 78
Then R. Eliezer and R. Akiva add multiples of 4x
and 5x for each plague - based on Tehillim 78:49. But
don't their drasha for granted, and that entire perek in
Tehllim relates to the deeper meaning of the Seder.
Take a quick look at Tehillim 78, noting the topic
of its 'header' in 78:1-8, where every generation is
instructed to teach the next generation about the great
miracles that God performed; but also not to be like their
forefathers, who DID NOT appreciate God's wonders, and
hence did not properly 'prepare their hearts' for their
redemption.
The chapter continues by listing all the great things that
God did for His people (in Chumash), and how Bnei Yisrael
consistently rebelled - leading to the punishment of that
generation. By studying our Biblical history, we are
supposed to learn a lesson; that we should 'prepare
ourselves' - to be ready for redemption whenever it comes;
as that very preparation can help bring redemption!
[Note also "v'hu rachum" in 78:38 in the context of this
chapter, and you'll understand why we recite so often in
our daily prayers!]
The second section of this chapter (from 78:41 thru
78:53), discusses how Bnei Yisrael should have learned to
fear God (but did not) from what they witnessed during the
Plagues. In that context, 78:44-51 describes most of the
Plagues (except 3,6,& 9 - the ones w/o warnings!) - yet
78:49 itself does not include the names of any of the
Plagues that we are familiar with.
It appears that this oddity is what leads to this drasha,
as we assume that 78:49 is describing one of the Plagues -
but with 4 (or 5) different descriptions. If so, then the
same could apply to all the plagues. Hence we can multiply
each plague by 4 or 5.
Finally, it may be that our Haggada includes this focus on
the miracles that took place when crossing the Red Sea, as
it was specifically after witnessing that miracle when
Bnei Yisrael responded with a beautiful song of Praise
("az yashir"). As we are about to praise Hashem in the
Hallel, it is fitting that we discuss the miracles of
Kriyat Yam Suf at out Seder - as a conclusion to the story
that we told.
[Note in the Rambam's nusach of MAGGID, he skips this
entire section. This suggests that this Midrash is an
additional 'elaboration', but not a necessary part of the
story that we must tell. In other words, if you need to
skip something, this section is a 'good candidate'.]
DAYENU
Now that the story is finished, it's time for
'praise' -following the format of the Mishna "matchilin
bi-gnut u-mesaymim be-shevach' - and we will now explain
how DAYENU serves as a special form of HALLEL (praise).
"Dayenu" is a very simple, yet beautiful poem -
containing fifteen stanzas describing acts of God's
kindness - each stanza stating that it would have been
'enough' had God only helped us in one way.
For example, we begin by saying it would have been
enough had He only taken us out of Egypt, and not punished
the Egyptians. The poem continues stage by stage through
the process of redemption from Egypt (until we arrive in
the Land of Israel and build the Temple), saying how each
stage would have been 'enough', even had God not helped us
with the next stage.
However, some of those statements appear very
strange, for they include that it 'would have been enough
had we not received the Torah', which simply doesn't make
sense!
[And how could a 'zionist' say, let alone sing, that -'it
would have been enough'- even if God had not given us the
Land of Israel?]
To understand what we are 'really saying' in
"dayneu", we must consider its context, as well as it
content.
We recite "dayenu" - precisely when we finish telling the
story of the Exodus (with the discussion of the Plagues) -
and right at the spot where we are supposed to begin our
"shevach" [praise].
Within this context, the refrain of "dayenu" has an
implicit suffix. In other words, - "dayenu" should not be
translated simply as 'it would have been enough'; rather,
"dayenu" means:
'it would have been enough - to PRAISE God, i.e. to say
Hallel -
In other words, we say as follows:
- Had God only taken us out of Egypt and not punished the
Egyptians, it would have been reason enough to say Hallel
- Had He split the sea, but not given us the 'manna',
that alone would have been reason enough to say Hallel...
... And so on.
With this background, the next paragraph of that
poem makes perfect sense:
"`al achat kama vekhama..."
- How much more so is it proper to thank God for He has
performed ALL these acts of kindness ..
He took us out of Egypt, and punished them, and split the
sea, and gave us the manna etc.
In essence, this beautiful poem poetically summarizes each
significant stage of redemption, from the time of the
Exodus until Am Yisrael's conquest of the Land - stating
how each single act of God's kindness in that process
would be reason enough to say Hallel, now even more so we
must say Hallel, for God did all of these things for us.
>From this perspective, "dayenu" serves a double purpose.
First and foremost, it concludes the story with "shevach"
[praise]. and qualifies the Hallel that we are about to
sing. However, it could also be understood as a
continuation of the story of the Exodus. Let's explain
why and how:
Recall that the last "drasha" [elaboration] on the psukim
of "arami oved avi" led into a lengthy discussion of the
Ten Plagues. To fulfill our obligation at the Seder' to
tell the story', we could (and do) finish right here. But
the poem of "dayenu" actually continues that story,
picking up from the Ten Plagues ["asa bahem shfatim"
refers to the Plagues], and continuing through all the
significant events in the desert until our arrival in the
Land of Israel and building the Temple.
This takes on additional significance, as it concludes in
the same manner as the final pasuk of "arami oved avi" -
which for some reason we do not include in our Seder (even
though according to the Mishna it appears that we really
should)! Recall that according to Devarim 26:9, the
proclamation should conclude with: "va'yvi'einu el
ha'Makom ha'zeh"
According to Chazal - he brought us to the Bet
ha'Mikdash!
"va'yiten lanu et ha'aretz ha'zot" he gave us the land of
Israel
Even though we don't elaborate upon this pasuk in our
version of Maggid, "dayenu" enables us to include it!
In this manner, the song of "dayneu" serves as both
"shevach" [praise] and "sippur" [story] - at the same
time!
It is also interesting to note that we find 15
levels of praise in the Dayenu, that most probably
correspond to the 15 steps leading to the Bet ha-Mikdash,
better known as the 'shir ha-ma'a lot', i.e. the 15 psalms
in Tehillim (120-134) / composed for each step.
The 'HASHKAFA' of DAYENU
According to our explanation thus far, "dayenu"
sets the stage for Hallel, as we will now praise God [by
singing Hallel] not only in gratitude for taking us out of
Egypt, but also in appreciation for each significant stage
of the redemptive process. We thank God not only for the
Exodus, but also for the 'manna', for shabbat, for coming
close to Har Sinai, for the Torah, for the Land of
Israel..., and finally for the building of the Bet
HaMikdash.
From a certain perspective, this poem may allude
to a very profound 'hashkafa' [outlook on life], and a
message that is very applicable to our own generation.
Today, there are those who focus at the Seder only on the
first stanza of "dayenu," viewing 'freedom from slavery'
as the final goal, and hence the ultimate goal of
redemption. For them, this first stanza of "dayenu" is
'enough' - and to them, that is the entire meaning of
Passover - a holiday of Freedom.
Others focus only upon the last stanza, that without the
entire land of Israel in our possession, and without the
re-building of the bet-ha'Mikdash, the entire redemptive
process is meaningless. In their eyes, Hallel should only
be sung when the entire redemption process is complete,
and Am Yisrael reaches its final goal.
The beautiful poem of "dayenu" seems to disagree with both
approaches. Instead, each significant stage in the
process of redemption deserves our recognition and for
requires that we praise God for it, even though it is 'not
enough'!
It is this hashkafic message, i.e., the
understanding and appreciation of each step of the
redemptive process, which "dayenu" can teach us. "Ge'ulat
Yisra'el" - the redemption of Israel - even in our time,
is a process which is comprised of many stages. Every
significant step in this process, be it simply
sovereignty, or partial borders, or victory in battle; or
freedom to study Torah, even without complete redemption,
requires our gratitude and praise to Hashem.
For each stage in that process, it is incumbent upon Am
Yisrael to recognize that stage and thank Hashem
accordingly, while at the same time recognizing that many
more stages remain yet unfulfilled - and reminding
ourselves of how we need act -to be deserving of that next
stage.
"Dayenu" challenges us to find the proper balance.
"RABBAN GAMLIEL"
Even though we have completed our story, before
continuing with the Hallel, the Haggada wants to make sure
that we also fulfill Rabban Gamliel's opinion (in Masechet
Pesachim chapter 10) that we have not fulfilled our
obligation of "v'higadta l'bincha" unless we have
explained the connection between that story and the
commandment to eat PESACH, MATZA & MAROR.
[It appears that Ramban Gamliel understands the word "zeh"
(in Shmot 13:8) refers to the 'korban Pesach' - probably
based on his understanding that the phrase "ha'avoda
ha'zot" in 13:5 also relates to 'korban Pesach'. Hence,
Raban Gamliel requires that we explain to our children
(and whoever is gathered) why we are eating not only
matza, but also pesach and maror.]
Rabban Gamliel's statement could also imply that
our obligation of eating matza and maror is not complete
unless we explain how they connect to the story that we
just told. This would explain why it is added at the
conclusion of the "sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim" section, as
we are about to fulfill our obligation to eat matza, and
maror.
[In our times, this section may also be considered a 'fill
in' for the KORBAN PESACH itself. During the time of the
Bet ha-Mikdash, MAGGID was said while eating the korban
pesach. Nowadays, since the korban cannot be offered, we
mention pesach, matza, and maror instead of eating the
korban. Thus, this section forms an excellent
introduction to the Hallel, which in ancient times was
recited as the Korban Pesach was offered, and later when
it was eaten.]
This section forms the conclusion of "sippur
Yetziat Mitzrayim", and sets the stage for our reciting of
Hallel - to praise God for our salvation.
[See Rambam Hilchot chametz u'matza 7:5, where his
concluding remark implies that "haggada" ends here.]
"BE-CHOL DOR VA-DOR"
Considering the integral connection between the events of
the Exodus and "brit avot" (discussed above) the statement
of:`"be-chol dor va-dor chayav adam lir'ot et atzmo ke-ilu
hu yatza mi-Mitzrayim..." takes on additional
significance.
Before we say HALLEL, we conclude our story by
stating that in every generation - each individual must
feel as though HE himself was redeemed from Egypt. As the
purpose of this entire historical process of redemption
was to prepare Am Yisrael for their national destiny - it
becomes imperative that every member of Am Yisrael feels
as though they experienced that same 'training mission'.
One could suggest that this closing statement
complements the opening statement of MAGGID (in the avadim
hayinu paragraph) that had God had not taken us out of
Egypt we would still enslaved until this very day. Now
that we have told the story of Yetziat Mitzrayim, we are
supposed to feel as though we ourselves were redeemed.
As stated in Devarim 6:20-25, the events of
Yetziat Mitzrayim obligate Am Yisrael to keep not only the
mitzvot of Pesach but ALL of the mitzvot of the Torah!
[See Sefer Kuzari section 1.]
[Note how the phrase "ve-otanu hotzi mi-sham" that we
recite in this section of MAGGID is quoted from Devarim
6:23! Note as well how Chazal most probably arrived at
this conclusion based on Moshe Rabeinu's statement in
Devarim 5:2-3 (at the very beginning of his main speech)
that God's covenant at Har Sinai was made with the new
generation, even though they themselves were not born
yet!]
BCHOL DOR V'DOR & SEFER DEVARIM
Note as well how the pasuk of "v'otanu hotzi
m'sham lmaan. [for the purpose of]..." (see 6:22-23) is
quoted at the end of MAGID in the "bchol dor v'dor"
section - and not by chance!
Recall as well how the final mitzvot of the main speech of
Sefer Devarim are found in chapter 26, namely "mikra
bikkurim" and "viddui maasrot". In light of our study of
Sefer Devarim and the sources in Sefer Shmot for Maggid
(relating to how the experience in Egypt served to
sensitize the nation - to act properly once they become
sovereign in their own land), one can suggest an
additional reason for why Chazal chose Mikra Bikurim -
from Devarim chapter 26 - as the official 'formula' by
which we tell the story.
Note how the Torah concludes our declaration in 26:5-9 by
reminding us (in 26:10-11) how we must be sure that the
stranger and Levite share in our happiness (for they have
no Land of their own, and hence they are not able to bring
their own first fruits).
It should also not surprise us that the next law, "vidduy
maasrot" at the end of every three years, emphasizes this
very same theme. Simply read its opening statement in
26:12-13, focusing on the need of the farmer to give the
necessary tithes to the poor and needy, the orphans,
widows, and strangers. Only afterwards does he have the
ethical 'right' to pray to God that He should continue to
bless the land and its produce - see 26:15!
This law forms a beautiful conclusion for many of the
earlier laws in the main speech of Sefer Devarim, again a
set of laws originally given to Bnei Yisrael at Har Sinai
(see Devarim 5:28), and ties nicely into the theme of
thanking God for our redemption while remembering its
purpose .
LEFICHACH / HALLEL
As an introduction to the first two chapters of
HALLEL, we recite 'lefichach...'. Note how this section
contrasts 'suffering' with 'redemption' (note the numerous
examples). This too may reflect our theme that we thank
God for the process, and not just for the event.
The two chapters of Hallel that we recite at this
time are also quite meaningful. The reason for 'be-tzeit
Yisrael mi-Mitzrayim' is rather obvious. But note the
opening words of the first chapter:
"hallelu AVDEI Hashem, hallelu et SHEM Hashem..."
In other words, as we are now God's servants
['avdei Hashem'] - and no longer slaves to Pharaoh, it is
incumbent upon us to praise our new master.
THE 'SECOND CUP'
We conclude Maggid with the blessing of "ge'ula"
[redemption] on the 2nd cup of wine.
As we recite this blessing, note how most
fittingly we express our hope that we will become worthy
of God's redemption speedily in our own time
A FINAL THOUGHT
As you may have noticed, even though much of our above
discussion may seem 'technical', it has all alluded to a
much deeper theme, that the Seder is not only about
'gratitude' - i.e. thanking God for what happened; but
more so - about 'destiny' - i.e. our need to recognize why
it happened. That goal could never be accomplished without
our tradition of the importance of Jewish education, the
obligation of each generation to teach the next, not only
about what did happen, but to learn from that history
(even from its mistakes - see again Tehillim 78:1-8!).
This tradition can enable our children to shape their
future in the proper manner.
Therefore, we conclude our study with a mini-shiur on the
topic of the Four Sons, as it reflects this message.
APPENDIX
THE FOUR SONS [K'NEGGED ARBA BANIM..]
Are the 'Four Sons' really in the Bible?
When we quote that Midrash at the Seder, we certainly get
that impression, for the Haggada quotes a pasuk from
Chumash as the source for each son. However, when you
take a closer look at that Midrash, you'll immediately
notice that when it does quote Chumash, it doesn't seem to
be very 'accurate'.
So, is the Midrash wrong?
Of course not! However, to appreciate its message - the
reader must realize that this Midrash is not explaining
Chumash, rather it is using psukim from Chumash to develop
a beautiful message. [Quite often, that's what Midrash is
all about!]
Therefore, to uncover the deeper meaning of the Midrash of
the Four Sons, we will first study "pshat" to find the
'real' reason for why there are 'four sons' in the
Chumash; that will enable us to appreciate what Chazal
intended to teach us by way of their beautiful "drash".
[It should be noted that the Midrash of the four sons that
we quote in the Hagadda is actually a Mechilta, and also
found in the Talmud Yerushalmi - See Haggadah Shlayma by
Rav Kasher for complete set of sources and versions.]
INTRODUCTION
Let's begin by quoting the opening line of this Midrash,
and translating it into English:
"Keneged arba'ah banim dibberah Torah"
[Corresponding to Four Sons - the Torah
spoke]
1) echad chacham - the wise son;
2) ve'echad rasha - the wicked son;
3) echad tam - the simple son;
4) ve'echad she'eino yodea lish'ol
- the son who doesn't know how to ask:
The Midrash continues by quoting a question for
each son -from the four instances in the Torah when a
father answers his son [i.e. when a parent answers his
child].
As it is commonly presumed that these four quotes all
pertain to questions about Passover - the assumption is
that it would have been enough had the Torah only recorded
only one 'question and answer'. But when we notice that
the Torah provides us with four different versions of
'questions and answers' - we assume that each version
'corresponds' to a different type of son. Based on this
understanding, the Torah is simply providing us with
'prepared answers' for four different personalities of
children.
This also seems to be what the Midrash implies by its
opening statement "k'negged arba banim dibra Torah" - that
the four times that the Torah discusses a parent answering
a child - 'corresponds' to these four types of children.
However, to our surprise, when we compare the
answers given by the Haggada to these four questions - to
the answers provided in Chumash, we find many
discrepancies!
Therefore, this original assumption must be incorrect!
[Unless we conclude that the Haggada isn't quoting Chumash
properly - which obviously cannot be.]
In the following shiur, we will first study the various
psukim that this Midrash quotes, while paying careful
attention to their original context. By doing so, we hope
to arrive at a deeper understanding of its message.
COMPARING ANSWERS
As we explained, the four questions are direct
quotes from Chumash, however - the answers that the
Haggada provides are very different than those given by
Chumash.
To illustrate this, let's compare these answers - one
question at a time, noting the obvious differences:
** The WISE son's question:
"Mah ha'edot vehachukkim vehamishpatim asher tzivah Hashem
Elokeinu etchem" ? [What are the laws... that God has
commanded us?] (see Devarim 6:20)
Answer in Chumash:
"avadim ha'yinu l'pharoh b'mitzraim ...." [ Tell your son:
We were once slaves to Pharoah and God took us out etc...]
(see Devarim 6:21-25 for the full answer)
Answer in Haggada:
" Ve'af attah emor lo khilchot hapesach, ein maftirim
achar hapesach afikoman." [Teach him the laws of the
pesach... -most likely this refers to the tenth chapter of
Mesechet Pesachim - teach him until the last mishna re:
afikomen ]
** The WICKED son's question:
"Mah ha'avodah hazot lachem?"
[What's this service to you?]
Answer in Chumash:
"v'amar'tem zevach pesach hu l'Hashem asher pa'sach al
batei bnei Yisrael b'Mitzraim..." [Tell your son that
this is the Pascal offering - for God had passed over our
houses when He smote the Egyptians..." (see Shmot 12:27)
Answer in Haggada:
"v'af atta hakheh et shinnav ve'emor lo:'ba'avur zeh asah
Hashem li betzeiti m'Mitzraim' ... [Even you should break
his teeth - and tell him if people like him were living at
that time - he would not have been worthy of
redemption...]
** The SIMPLE son's question:
" Mah zot?" - What is this [about]?
Answer in Chumash:
"Bechozek yad hotzi'anu Hashem m'Mitzrayim m'beit avadim.
V'yhi ki hiyksha Pharoh l'shalcheinu -va'yaharog kol bchor
b'eretz Mitzraim, m'bchor adam ad bchor b'haymah" - [God
took us out of Egypt from the house of slavery, and when
He took us out, God killed their first born... and
therefore I am dedicating the first born of every womb to
God..."
(see Shmot
13:14-16)
Answer in Haggada:
"Bechozek yad hotzi'anu Hashem m'Mitzraim mibeit avadim."
- God took us out of Egypt with an outstretched Hand -
[but nothing more! In other words, we only quote the first
phrase of the answer.]
** The son WHO DOESN'T KNOW TO ASK'
question: XXX
As there is no question in Chumash, the Midrash
only quotes the Torah's answer of "vehiggadta livincha
bayom hahu lemor, 'ba'avur zeh asa Hashem li betzeiti
mimitzrayim.'" (see Shmot 13:8). Therefore, the Midrash
cannot provide a different answer, since the question (or
lack of one) is implicit from the answer.
Instead, the Midrash notes this instance in Chumash where
we are commanded to explain something to our children,
even though it was not preceded by a question. The
Midrash identifies this son as the one who doesn't know
how to ask.
[As there is only an answer, we can not expect to find a
discrepancy between Chumash and the Haggada for this son.]
This simple comparison between the first three of
the four sons, immediately confirms that the answers in
Chumash are very different than those in the Haggada.
So why can't the Midrash quote Chumash correctly?
DIFFERENT TOPICS or DIFFERENT SONS
The reason why is rather simple. If we examine
these four questions in Chumash, and study their context,
we will indeed find four questions, but each question
relates to a different TOPIC - not to a different son!
To prove this, let's return to each question,
noting its context in Chumash: [Be sure to have a Chumash
handy, to follow along.]
The WISE son's 'topic': the ENTIRE TORAH
Take a quick glance at Devarim chapter six, noting
how it introduces a complete set of laws that Moshe
Rabeinu is about to teach. See 6:1, note also 5:1, 5:28,
and especially 4:45 - as they are all psukim that
introduce this same set of laws. Note as well that the
psukim that we say every day in Shema (4:4-8) are part of
this same introduction.
As this set of laws that Moshe is teaching will
continue for some twenty chapters (from chapter 6 thru
26), the opening section deals with the underlying reason
for these laws. In this context, Moshe Rabeinu
'anticipates' in 6:20:
"Should your child ask you: 'what [is the reason for]
these 'eidot chukim u'mishpatim' that God is commanding
us?"
(see 6:20/ compare with 4:45!)
Then, the Torah tells us to answer our child as follows:
"We were once slaves in Egypt, but God took us out with a
strong arm... and God took us out - in order to bring us
to the land that He promised to our forefathers. And He
commanded us to keep these laws to fear Him, and for our
own good... " (see Devarim 6:21-25)
Obviously, this 'question & answer' has nothing to
do with the personality of any type of son. [If any, it
sounds more like a 'wise guy' asking, more so than a 'wise
son'!]
In fact, this question sounds like a very logical one that
almost any child will (and should) ask, when confronted
with the obligation to keep a complete set of laws that
govern every walk of life. Furthermore, this question is
not about the Seder, nor about Passover! It's a question
about the very reason for why we are charged to keep the
entire Torah!
[Note how in the Haggada we use the first line of this
answer ("avadim hayinu...") to answer the "mah nishtana".
Based on the context of these psukim, it is a very
meaningful starting point to begin our explanation for the
Exodus in Maggid.]
The WICKED son's 'topic': KORBAN PESACH
Return now to Sefer Shmot chapter 12, and take a
quick glance noting how it begins with "Parshat
ha'Chodesh" (12:1-20), - that describes the laws of the
'korban Pesach' in Egypt; and continues with Moshe
Rabeinu's instructions to the people (see 12:21-28),
including the commandment to offer a similar 'korban
Pesach' on a yearly basis, once they arrive in the Land of
Israel (see 12:23-26). In that context, we find yet
another very logical question, that any son could (and
should) ask:
"When you come to the land... keep this service [of korban
Pesach] - and it shall come to pass when your children
will ask you: 'What is [the purpose] of this service to
you' - then you shall explain: ' This is a Passover
offering for God, [to remember how] He passed over the
houses of Israel, when He smote the Egyptians..." (see
12:24-27)
Once again, a very logical question, followed by a
very logical answer, concerning the topic of KORBAN
PESACH.
Without 'reading in' to the words of this
question, there is no reason to assume that Chumash is
talking about a 'wicked son'. In fact, it seems that
Chumash expects (and wants) our children to ask this
question!
The SIMPLE son's 'topic': KEDUSHAT BECHOR
Let's continue our study by jumping to Shmot
chapter 13, noting the parshia that begins in 13:11 (thru
13:16), that records the laws relating to "kedushat
bechor" [the holiness of the first born] - that the first
born of both humans and animals should be dedicated to the
service of God (see 13:11-13).
At the conclusion of those laws, the Torah anticipates
once again a question from an inquisitive child, this time
asking "mah zot" -[what is this all about (see 13:14).
As this question concerns specifically the topic of the
'first-born' - the Torah proposes an answer that relates
exactly to that question:
"And tell him [your son] - God took us out of Egypt from
the house of slavery, and when He took us out, God killed
their first born... therefore I am dedicating the male
first born of every womb to God..." (see 13:15-16)
Once again, the topic is not about the Seder or Passover;
rather the topic is "kedushat bechor". Indeed, this time
the question is much shorter than in the first two
instances; nonetheless - the reason for this additional
question is because of the additional topic - and not
necessary because he is a 'simple son'.
The DOESN'T KNOW TO ASK son's 'topic': EATING MATZA
Let's return now to the beginning of Shmot chapter 13, and
quickly review from 13:3-8, noting how these psukim
discuss the commandment to remember the Exodus by eating
matza for seven days (and by not eating chametz).
[Note as well how 13:1-2 actually belongs with 13:11-15 -
a topic that was discussed in our shiur on Parshat Bo; but
beyond the scope of this shiur.]
After detailing the laws concerning eating matza
for seven days, while not owning or seeing any chametz
(see 13:6-7), the Torah concludes with a commandment that
we must explain why to our children even if they don't
ask:
"And you shall tell you son on that day, for the sake of
this [matza] God did for me [these miracles] when I went
out of Egypt" (see 13:8)
The commandment to remember the Exodus is so
important that Chumash demands that we explain why to our
children, even if they don't ask. In "pshat", this
doesn't imply that we are dealing with a child that
doesn't know how to ask; it is simply because this mtizva
is of cardinal importance!
[This is supported by Rashi & Ibn Ezra's interpretation -
that this pasuk implies that we explain to our children
that God took us out of Egypt in order that would be able
to keep all of His mitzvot!.]
To summarize our study, the following table summarizes how
the four instances in Chumash where the father answers his
son relates to a unique topic, even each topic does relate
in one form or another to the Exodus.
QUESTION CONTEXT TOPIC
========= ======== =====
Shmot 12:26 12:21-28 Korban
PESACH.
Shmot 13:8 13:3-10 Chag
HaMATZOT.
Shmot 13:14 3:11-16 Ke'dushat
BCHOR.
Devarim 6:20, 6:1-25 ALL the MITZVOT
None of these questions are 'superfluous', as each
question deals with a specific topic. Therefore,
according to 'pshat' there is no necessity to relate these
four questions to four different types of children, rather
- there are four questions in Chumash because there are
four topics in Chumash!
Could it be that the Midrash is unaware that each
question relates to a different topic?
We posit exactly the opposite - that the Midrash is fully
aware of the "pshat" and expects that the reader is
intelligent enough to figure it out on his own. However,
as is often the case, the Midrash is not coming to teach
us the "pshat" of Chumash, rather it is 'using' psukim in
Chumash to convey a thought; or in our case - an
educational message.
In our specific case, the Midrash of the 'Four
Sons' is interested in giving over an insight relating to
education, a thought that carries special significance at
the Seder, following the guideline of the Mishna that:
"k'daat ha'ben, aviv m'lamdo" - According to the level of
the son - the father should teach (or tell over) the
story.
(see Mesechet Pesachim - 10th chapter)
The Midrash wishes to expound upon this
educational principle. In a very clever style, the
Midrash first 'borrows' the four questions mentioned in
Chumash when a father answers his son, quoting them
totally out of their original context, and turning them
into questions about the Seder.
As the original wording of each of these four questions in
Chumash is quite different, the Midrash utilizes this to
attach an identity to each question, conforming to four
different types of children.
Then, to convey its educational message, the Midrash
composes a special answer for each son, which relates
specifically to his personality (and not to its original
topic in Chumash).
For example, in the wise son's question, the phrase "mah
ha'eidot" is interpreted as 'what are the laws' [of the
Seder], while in Chumash it means 'what is the purpose of
these laws' [of the entire Torah]. Therefore, the answer
to this question in the Haggada is totally different than
the answer in Chumash.
Similarly, to turn the wicked son's question into a real
'wicked son' - the Haggada must first add some inflection
into his voice, making the word "lachem" ['for you'] more
emphatic - to emphasize his attitude problem. Therefore,
the answer once again is not the same as the one in
Chumash, instead the Midrash 'borrows' its wording from
elsewhere in Chumash: "ba'avur zeh asa Hashem LI" (see
Shmot 13:8) - once again adding inflection, this time
emphasizing the word "li" - for ME and not for YOU.
For the simple son's question "mah zot" [What is this?] -
the Midrash finds no need to make an alteration. However,
since this question in the Midrash is about the Seder, it
truncates the answer provided by Chumash (about kedushat
bechor), quoting only the first phrase - in order to keep
it short, and relevant only to the Seder (see 13:14-15!).
In essence, the Midrash provides us with four examples of
how to 'read between the lines' of a question in order to
discern the character of the son who is asking.
FOR PARENTS & TEACHERS
In real life, when the parent hears the question
of a child; or when the teacher hears the question of a
student; he must listen carefully not to the QUESTION, but
also to the PERSON behind the question. To answer a
question properly, the parent must not only understand the
question, but must also be aware of the motivation behind
it. Hence, his answer must not only be accurate, but also
appropriate, as it must relate to the child's character
while taking into account his spiritual needs.
The parent (and teacher) must listen carefully to
the voice behind the question, evaluate and answer
appropriately. When necessary he can even innovate, just
as the Midrash does!
This message conveyed by the Midrash of 'the Four
Sons' in the Haggada is not only the responsibility of
every parent, but also the challenge of every teacher.
Understanding it correctly enables us to pass down our
tradition from father to son, our heritage from generation
to generation; certainly a Midrash worth quoting at our
Seder Table.
chag
samayach,
menachem
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: magid3.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 113894 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-new/attachments/20090408/20fb1f0f/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the Par-new
mailing list