diff --git "a/json/Liturgy/Haggadah/Commentary/Divrei Negidim on Pesach Haggadah/English/merged.json" "b/json/Liturgy/Haggadah/Commentary/Divrei Negidim on Pesach Haggadah/English/merged.json" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/json/Liturgy/Haggadah/Commentary/Divrei Negidim on Pesach Haggadah/English/merged.json" @@ -0,0 +1,403 @@ +{ + "title": "Divrei Negidim on Pesach Haggadah", + "language": "en", + "versionTitle": "merged", + "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Divrei_Negidim_on_Pesach_Haggadah", + "text": { + "Kadesh": [ + [], + [ + "Shabbat HaGadol
The Sabbath before Passover is called Shabbat HaGadol. It is customary to read the Haggadah from avadim hayyinu, “We were slaves in Egypt,” through likhapper al kol avonoteinu, “To atone for all our sins.”*Avadim hayyinu is the beginning of Maggid, the formal telling of the story of the Exodus in the Haggadah. Likhapper al kol avonoteinu is the end of dayyenu, marks the end of the actual telling of the Exodus story. It is followed by Rabban Gamliel’s statement in which he talks about the obligation to interpret the meaning of pesach, matzah and maror. Some have suggested that this Sabbath was originally called Shabbat Haggadah and not Shabbat HaGadol. Clearly the Maharal understood it differently. It is also customary to offer a public discourse on the laws and meanings of Passover. The name Shabbat HaGadol is based on a verse in the Haftorah that is read in synagogue, “Lo, I will the prophet Elijah to you before the coming of the great and fearful day of the Lord.” (Mal. 3:23) The Exodus is characterized as “greatness” because of the great and awesome acts which God performed when The Holy One took Israel out of Egypt, as in the following statement from the Haggadah: “with great awe: this refers to the revelation of the Divine Presence.” It is made known and promised to us from our Eternal redeemer through his servants the prophets that in the future that Israel shall attain an even higher state of being when the Holy One performs great and awesome acts, as it is stated, “As in the days when you came out of the Land of Egypt I will tell him marvelous things.” (Mic. 7:15) The night of Passover is called the night of guarding, because it is being guarded for future times.
All things that are realized during the six days of the week are awakened to potential in the world above on the Sabbath previous to them. On Shabbat the gates of heaven are opened and preparation is made for future salvation. That is why the Sabbath before Passover is called Shabbat HaGadol. On it we anticipate the power of the opening of the gates and the preparation for future salvation of Israel which will happen on the “great and awesome day.” We give strength to these events by reciting the Haggadah and sharing insights into Jewish law and lore. The essence of Israel’s strength rests in their words, as is stated, “We offer the words of our lips instead of calves.” (Hos. 14:3) That is why we recite words of Torah and prayer for the things that were lost with the destruction of our Holy Temple.
In Egypt the Israelites did not have a means of affecting the Divine Presence such Torah and prayer. That is why they were commanded to set aside the Passover offering on the tenth day of the month in preparation for the offering. This took place, according to the Midrash, on the Sabbath before Passover. The Midrash interprets Exodus 12:21 mishkhu u’khu, to mean, “draw” your hands away from idolatry “and bring” the Passover offering. By setting aside the offering, the people initiated the power of redemption. *We often think of the Sabbath as marking the end of the previous week. The Maharal suggests that the Sabbath sets the tone in this world and in the world above for the week that is coming. Shabbat Teshuvah prepares us for a meaningful act of repentance. And Shabbat HaGadol opens the gates of salvation so that when the new week arrives the final act of salvation can take place.
Similarly, the Sabbath before Yom Kippur is called Shabbat Teshuvah. The power of Yom Kippur is that it is a day of turning to the Lord through five forms of affliction, prayers, tears, and crying out to God. Through these actions the Holy One absolves the people of their sins and returns them to their original state of being. The beginning of the preparation is on the previous Sabbath so that the potential of Yom Kippur becomes possible by first arousing the world above. This happens when all Israel resolves to return to the Lord on the Sabbath before Yom Kippur. That is why it is called Shabbat Teshuvah.
So, too, the Sabbath before Passover is called Shabbat HaGadol since we make all the necessary preparation for the salvation that will occur in the coming week.
It is \"a guarded day\" *The expression Leil Shemurim, a day of guarding\" is taken from Exodus 12:42 on which God’s glory is magnified in the entire world as the world anticipates the coming of the “great and awesome day.”", + "", + "The Mystical Meaning of the Four Cups of Wine
The sages decreed that we should drink four cups of wine and that they should be consumed as a sacred act and not as an ordinary act of consumption. The Midrash teaches that the four cups are for the four expressions for redemption: \"I will take you out of the burdens of Egypt....\" There are many interpretations for these expressions. One interpretation is related to the prophecies that God gave to Abraham: “Your offspring shall be strangers;” “they shall be subjugated;” “they shall be afflicted for four hundred years” (Gen. 15:13) Each of these prophecies are more severe than the previous one.Your offspring shall be strangers: meaning that his descendents shall live as strangers in a foreign land. They will have no autonomy and will be live under the domination of others just as a strange is must live under the domination of his or her host. But they will not be subjugated to by their host. *One of the characteristics of exile is powerlessness. While we may not be subjugated to our hosts we also do not have the power and autonomy to choose our own destiny.
They shall be subjugated: Then they will become enslaved to their masters in Egypt but this will not be worse than the fate of any other slaves who must serve a masters.
They shall be oppressed: This is the worst stage of all: they will be oppressed by their masters. It is not the way of masters to oppress their slaves. They are simply subjugated to them. Therefore, “oppressed” is the worst status of all.
When God redeemed Israel, He fulfilled the promises that He made to Abraham in the order opposite the original promises.*Exodus 6: 6-7. Say, therefore, to the Israelite people: I am the LORD.
1. I will free you from the labors of the Egyptians (oppression)
In Genesis (They shall be oppressed)
2. I will deliver you from their bondage. (slavery)
In Genesis, They shall be subjugated
3. I will redeem you with an outstretched arm (status as outsiders) -
In Genesis, Your offspring shall be strangers
4. I will take you to be My people, and I will be your God.
(Redemption by establishing a relation with God) First God promised, “I will take you out from the burdens of Egypt” that is, first God will free them from oppression. Afterwards, God said, “I will save you from slavery” meaning, then God will remove their status as slaves. Finally God promises, “I will redeem you” that is, he will remove them from living under the domination of another people, in a strange land. Regarding this act, God promised, “I will redeem you with an outstretched arm.”
Once God has redeemed them from a foreign nation, they were still lacking a connection to the Holy One. Regarding this, God promises, “I will take you to be My people.” This is how we explain the four promises of redemption.
In addition to explaining the redemption through the Passover symbols of pesach, matzah and maror, the sages added the four cups which represent a higher level of redemption than the Passover foods. There is a separation between eating and drinking. Eating is a more physical act. Drinking is more refined and anything that is more refined is more distant from the material.*Pesach, matzah and maror represent Israel’s liberation from physical slavery while the four cups of wine represent the inner spiritual process of redemption. The food is physical while the wine represents the spiritual. This is especially true in the case of wine which is separate from the materiality and the coarseness of the grapes. Therefore drinking the four cups represent a higher level of redemption.
When leaving Egypt, the Israelites were compared to an infant that enters the world. The four cups of wine symbolize the completion of this process of redemption. The infant that has already been born and have entered the physical world but its form is not quite complete and fitting yet. *This notion of the infant still being in formation would explain why, in Jewish law, one does not sit shiva for an infant that dies with the first thirty days of life. The Conservative movement has suggested today when still born infants are less common that parents should sit shiva during the first month, or if an infant is born still born. This is a higher level of redemption because it must complete its formation.
Yet if the wine represents the higher form of redemption, why doesn’t the Torah also contain a commandment to drink four cups of wine?
This is not surprising. Physical liberation, represented by the food, was represents the outer aspect of the Exodus while wine was the spiritual redemption, through which the people of Israel connected to the Holy One. The four expressions: “I took you out,” “I saved you,” “I redeemed you,” and “I took you to be my people” represent the redemption as it went forth from God as a kind of divine order. They are represented by wine because the wine is hidden in the grapes, as the sages taught: yayin (wine) and sod (mystery) both have the gemartria, the numerical value, of seventy. “Where the wine goes in, mystery goes forth.” (Eruvin 65a) *The expression is frequently quoted in rabbinic medieval literature. It is close to the Latin, “in vino veritas,” but a lot more fun since the words yayin and sod have the same numerical value!
This is not just a play on words and numerical values. Rather, this is a truth about the essence of wine. The wine is the hidden essence which is found in the grapes. It represents the hidden mysteries of the universe since it is hidden in the wine \"When a person drinks wine the mystery goes forth.\"
The redemption comes from a higher world. It is a world of unity and simplicity. The world we live in is a world of plurality. That which comes from the upper world into this world is divided into a plurality of four parts which are the four expressions of redemption. These four are the four sides of existence which are connected to the four types of redemption.*The four “sides” of existence may represent the four elements of the created world: fire, air, water and earth. It may also be four dimensions of reality Maharal connects the four aspects of redemption with the four elements of creation…
This mystery is found in the story of the Garden of Eden. The Torah states, “A river issued from Eden to water the garden, and it then divides and becomes four branches…” (Gen. 2:10) From this passage we learn that all things that go forth from the exalted world *The Hebrew expression here is olam hanivdal, literally the separated world. It is the expression that Maharal uses for the spiritual world above. The upper world is unified when something enters the physical world, it becomes multiplied into many. The upper world is one while the lower world (this world) is complex and many parts) just as the river flows from Eden to water the garden. When it enters the natural universe it becomes a plurality, which we refer to as the world of plurality.
There is also a fifth cup of wine which is not obligatory.*The Talmud discusses whether there should be a fifth cup of wine at the seder. Later the matter of the fifth cup will be explained, what its source is, and how it is still a commandment even though it is not obligatory to drink it. All of these cups are part of the process of redemption, and he exalted level that they are associated with. Eating matzah is not on the same spiritual level as the drinking of the four cups of wine. Whatever is on the highest spiritual level includes that which is below it, therefore, the cups of wine are associated with the meal: two before the meal and two after the meal. In this way the wine includes the Passover meal.
Because the third cup of wine is associated with, “I shall redeem you with and outstretched arm,” and the fourth cup is, “I will take you to be My people,” the law is that one cannot drink in between the third and fourth cups of wine. These two steps are connected with one another: God redeemed Israel so that God could make them His nation and they could make God their God. This explains why we find that wherever the Exodus is mentioned in Scripture, Scripture continues with, “I am the Lord your God who took you out of the land of Egypt.” This explicitly suggests that the purpose of the Exodus was to create a relationship between God and Israel. That is why the Exodus is the foundation of faith. Similarly, the beginning of the Ten Commandments is, “I am the Lord your God who took you out of the land of Egypt…” There should be no separation between the redemption and the covenant with God to one who understands the mysteries of Torah….
There is another homiletical explanation that connects the four cups of wine with pesach, matzah and maror. These three symbols represent the fact that we were taken out of Egypt because of the merit of the ancestors. It was because of them that Israel was redeemed.
The Passover offering represents Jacob. He is the chosen one of the forefathers. We are to bring a ‘pure sheep;’ Jacob is also called, “Israel is a scattered sheep.” (Jer. 50:17)… Thus we learn that Jacob is a sheep and like the offering we must strive to be a pure sheep.
Isaac is compared to maror, the bitter herbs. He was bitter when he lost his eye sight. In the Midrash, it is stated that Isaac was the forefather who introduced suffering. He said to God, “Master of the Universe – is it proper that a person should die without having experienced suffering? As a result, if a person faces no suffering then he will ultimately face the attribute of judgement. By experiencing suffering now, he will not face judgment in the world to come. God answered Isaac, “By your life you have made a good claim! From your time on I shall begin doing this.”*The concept here is that by suffering in this life, we are exempted from some of the punishment – din – in the world to come. While Isaac was still standing before God, God caused him to experience suffering, as it is stated, “When Isaac grew old, his eyes grew dim.” (Gen. 27:1)
Abraham is compared to matzah. Abraham was set apart from the leaven that is found among the other nations just as unleavened bread is separated from the leaven. *In the Talmud “leaven” is a code word for the evil impulse.
Thus, the sages suggest in many Midrashim that pesach, matzah, and maror represent Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The four cups of wine which are combined with these symbols represent the four matriarchs. As we have already said, the drinking of the wine is secondary to the eating. Since the pesach, matzah, and maror represent the merit of the patriarchs, the four cups of wine come to represent the merit of the matriarchs, since they are secondary to the men.*Referring to the women as secondary is troubling to us as moderns but not uncommon in the Maharal’s writings and in Kabbalah in general. He has already said above that the wine is more spiritual than the symbolic foods and that it then represents the spiritual journey from slavery to redemption.
It was through the merit of the matriarchs and the patriarchs together that Israel gained the merit to be redeemed from Egypt, as the sages said regarding the following verse, “The voice of my beloved! Behold he comes leaping upon the mountains and skipping upon the hills.” (Song 2:8) The Holy One said “If I judge Israel on their deeds, they would not be redeemed. But if I look at the merit of their ancestors then they are worthy of redemption, as it said, “Leaping upon the mountains – the word mountains refers to the forefathers, as is stated, “Hear O mountains, the Lords controversy and you strong foundations of the earth.” (Micah 6:2)*Foundations, eitanim, is a code word often used by the sages to refer to the patriarchs. Also, the word mountains, in Hebrew harim, is masculine, so he takes it as another reference to the patriarchs. Gevaot, hills, has a feminine suffix and so it must refer to the matriarchs. According to this the reference to the hills refers to the matriarchs. These four cups, then, refer to the four mothers, as in the verse, “Your wife shall be like a fruitful vine.” (Ps. 128:3)", + "The Arrangement of the Seder Table
The table should be arranged the day before the Seder with beautiful utensils. The seats should be set up so that there is room for leaning during the Seder. The Seder plate should be arranged in the following manner:
Take large plate that is not too deep but is wide. Place three sh’murah matzot in the middle of it. The first one placed represents Kohen, the second Levi and the third, Yisrael. Cover the matzot with a lovely cloth. On top of the cover place a long plate and on it place six foods: On the top, there is a roasted shank to the right and a roasted egg to the left; below them, maror to the right and the haroset in a lovely utensil to the left; below them, karpas to the right and saltwater to the left.
This Seder plate does should not conflict with the principle that “one should not pass over an opportunity to perform a commandment.”*The concept here is that the items on the Seder plate should normatively be placed in the order in which one performs the commandment. His order does not seem to reflect this idea. Thus, from bottom to top the order of the symbolic foods reflects the proper order of the Seder customs. One should be cautious, however, that the mystical interpretations of the law do not contradict this principle of halachah. Similarly, one should be careful that if one hasn’t prepared the salt water from the previous day, one should first pour the water into the utensil and then add the salt. *Water may symbolizes the divine principles of hesed, lovingkindness while salt is din. One should put the lovingkindness in first. God knows the good intentions of the heart so that even if one does not understand the mystical meanings, he should still perform the customs in their proper sequence with a whole heart, according to their mystical intention. Then the Holy One will give one credit as if one had all the proper intentions.
Nevertheless, I will not refrain from explaining a little bit about the mystical significance of this custom. It is well known that Passover is he holiday that is meant to strengthen one’s faith, and therefore the sages organized the customs so that they would hint at faith:
• The large plate symbolizes the highest divine level of Keter
• The three matzot are symbols of the next levels, Hokhmah, Binah and da’at. Those who suggest that there should only be two matzot on the Seder plate are of the opinion that da’at is not one of the levels.
• The matzah cover represents the curtain that separates the levels which are knowable and those that are beyond comprehension.
• The six items on the Seder plate represent the six directions or additional levels.*The Maharal does not use the word Sephirah/Sephriot. Instead he uses the word madreigah, or level. It is possible that the word had not yet become quite so popular yet.
Hesed (Gedulah), Gevurah, Tiferet, Netzah, Hod, and Yesod are the six lower Sephirot or levels. These six levels correspond to the six directions that shape reality: North, South, East and West plus up and down. The shank bone is Gedulah, the egg is Gevurah, maror is Tiferet, the haroset is Netzah, the karpas is Hod, and the salt water symbolizes Yesod which is also associated with the eternal covenant of salt.
• The plate on which all these items are placed is the level of Malkut.
• To those with understanding who have entered the secret of God, this is fully understood. Since in his order the mystical intentions and the halachah do not conflict with one another, this is the proper order for all Israel to follow.", + "Wearing a Kittel at the Seder
It is customary to wear a kittel on Passover even when conducting the Seder. White is a simple color, without any complexity. This is a way of stating that the redemption came from the higher world and not from this world of complexity. Similarly the High Priest wore white garments on the Day of Atonement when entering the Holy of Holies because he wish to attain the highest spiritual level. Passover, the day of guardedness is similar to Yom Kippur in this regard. The meaning of the two customs is a mystery.
Images from the Prague Haggadah. Can you tell which one of these images represents the wicked child? How do you know?" + ] + ], + "Urchatz": [], + "Karpas": [], + "Yachatz": [], + "Magid": { + "Ha Lachma Anya": [ + [], + [], + [ + "Why We Begin the Seder with Matzah The Seder begins with “This is the bread of poverty” and not \"This is like the bread of poverty,\"*Some versions of the Haggadah begin K'ha lachma anya: “This is like the bread of poverty.” as it is written, \"In order that you may see the bread that I fed you… when I brought you out of Egypt.\" (Ex. 16:32) *Ex. 16:32, the verse quoted here, is actually a reference to the manna which was put aside as a reminder of the food which our ancestors ate upon leaving Egypt. Similarly, ‘the bread of poverty’ which we eat is the same as the bread which we ate at the time of the Exodus. The sages began with this statement in order to publicize “the bread of poverty” which our ancestors ate in the Egypt. By beginning with lechem oni, it illustrates the rabbinic interpretation of this expression. The sages explain that matzah is called lechem oni because there is much to say (onim) about it.*See Pesahim 36a The Hebrew words for poverty (oni) and for answer (oneh) are written with similar letters. The bread of poverty inspires us to explain the meaning of this bread and to answer many questions about it. Matzah inspires us to tell the story and carry out the rituals of the Seder. We begin with the unleavened bread and read a statement referring to this bread in order that we may see that everything afterwards is a reference to the bread with which the Seder began.
Had the Seder opened with Mah Nishtanah, it would not be clear that the Seder is about explaining the significance of unleavened bread. By beginning, \"This is the bread…\" and calling it by this name, and then continuing with the four questions, it becomes clear that the entire ceremony is about explaining that there is much to say about matzah. Since this is a statement that is recited by the head of the household, it is recited in any language that the members of the household will understand.
Why is matzah called lechem oni, ‘the bread of poverty?’ A rich person is as likely to eat the matzah as a poor person, and besides, why is poverty associated with redemption. *The Maharal adds: “There many interpretations of this expression. Some say that it is called lachma anya because it is lowly like a poor person and not elevated. Others say it is called lachma anya because it is a fitting food for poor because it hard to digest. The Egyptians fed the Israelites unleavened bread so that it would remain in their stomachs while they were working. These explanations contradict Scripture…”
Unleavened bread is called the bread of poverty because it is the opposite of enriched bread. When adding oil or honey to dough it becomes ashira,*Matzah Ashira is the term we use for egg matzah. Matzah is ideally made with flour and water and nothing else. Adding other liquids or eggs to it enrich it. On the first night of Passover we are commanded to eat the plainest matzah. Since matzah with other ingredients is enriched, when only water and flour are used, the matzah is considered “poor.” enriched. Similarly, a poor person has no possessions other than himself and his body. Matzah is also made of the most basic ingredients, flour and water. When one adds yeast or leavening to the plain ingredients, it becomes richer…Similarly, when we add juice or other liquids to the ingredients in matzah it becomes ashira, enriched.
What is the connection between “poverty” and redemption? Aren’t they opposites? Poverty teaches us about redemption. A person only becomes free when one has no attachments. The slave does not independent because he is subservient on his master. Similarly, a person who is rich does not stand on his own since he is attached to his possessions. As a result, neither can attain redemption. The poor person, on the other hand, who has no possessions, is able to attain redemption.
Therefore we are commanded to eat the bread of poverty on the eve of redemption because matzah has only the most basic ingredients and no leavening. It is like the poor person who only has the very essence of existence. Thus, we attain redemption by becoming detached from unnecessary things. Enriched matzah (even though it is unleavened), has additional ingredients such as juice added to it so it does not symbolize the necessary conditions for redemption.*Matzah is associated with redemption. If the purpose of matzah, or the bread of poverty, is to describe people who were now free, one would have to wonder about this connection, since we do not usually connect poverty with freedom. Rather matzah makes us aware that the essence of the Exodus only takes place when we are detached from things and from others. Only when one has no attachment can there be redemption.
From this you will understand the meaning of Scripture, \"You shall eat no leavened bread with it; seven days shall you eat unleavened bread with it, the bread of poverty, for you came out of the land of Egypt in haste…\" (Deut. 16:3) The bread of poverty means bread which stands by itself and is not connected to does not include any other ingredients. Why must you eat this bread? Because you left Egypt and ate it in haste. There was no attempt to prolong or delay in eating the matzah. Matzah is made with haste, just as Israel left Egypt with haste in the first month, so there was no delay in eating the unleavened bread, and no additions to it. Redemption must be immediate and absolute without unnecessary additions.", + "Matzah and Simplicity There is another way in which matzah is related to the bread of poverty, and redemption. The poor person has nothing, so his life is simplified and he stands detached from the world of things. In this complex material world such simplicity is considered a shortcoming. In the divine realm (olam hapashut), *The divine and spiritual realm is called olam hapashut, the world of simplicity. The physical world is called olam harkavah, the world of complexity. simplicity is a virtue. That is why we are commanded to eat matzah, the simplest form of bread. It contains nothing but the most essential ingredients… Israel was redeemed on this night from the complex material world through the higher spiritual realm. So, too, we are commanded to eat matzah which epitomizes this simplicity of the divine realm.
This ideal of simplicity is also expressed in the clothing that the high priest wore on Yom Kippur. Throughout the year he dressed in golden garments, but on Yom Kippur he wore plain white garments when entering the Holy of Holies. Since he was about to encounter the highest spiritual realm, he had to get rid of the trappings of the material world. When he entered the Holy of Holies on Yom Kippur he dressed in white, which represents the qualities of holiness and simplicity. This is the meaning of the verse, \"Seven days shall you eat matzot, the bread of poverty, for you came out of the land of Egypt b'hipazon, in haste.” (Deut. 16:3) The people left Egypt in haste, without tarrying, signifying that they left at the highest spiritual level. B'hipazon suggests that there was timelessness to the way they left unlike natural activities that involve the passage of time. Therefore it is fitting to eat the lechem oni which is the simplest bread without other ingredients.
The Talmud says that matzah is lechem oni*The word עוני is spelled without a vav but it is pronounced as if there were vav. The Aramaic word for it used in the Haggadah is spelled with an aleph. Hebrew words are derived from three letter root words. Oni comes from the same root as Ani, poor. But it might as easily be derived from the root oneh which means to answer or explain. The Talmud explains the expression lechem oni as the bread that explains the story of the Exodus. But if the word oni comes from this root than it should have been written correctly as aniya. That is why the Talmud offers a second explanation. In this way it suggests that lechem oni is associated with both possible interpretations of the word oni. because it is \"the bread over which we recite (onim) many things.\" (Pesahim 115a) This means that we publicize the Exodus through matzah; through it we learn the nature of the Exodus from Egypt. Therefore it is fitting to tell the story of the Exodus with the unleavened bread. But there is a difficulty with this explanation. If this is so, it should have been עניא called lechem aniya עניה ; Why is it called lechem oni עוני then? The Talmud also interprets the word oni as coming from the word poor, \" It is called the bread of (עני ani - poverty): just as a beggar generally takes a piece, so here too a piece is taken. Another interpretation: just as a poor man fires the oven while his wife bakes, so here too, he heats and she bakes.\" Yet if it referred to the poor it should have been written ani עני instead of Oni עוני . Therefore both interpretations of the word can be derived from Oni.", + "All Who are hungry Come and Eat … There are two different expressions here. For those who are hungry, we say, kol d'khfin, “All who are hungry,” come eat the bread of poverty. For those who have food but don’t have the means to observe the rituals of Passover eve, we say, kol d'tzrikh, “All who are in need, come celebrate Passover.
The statement goes on to say that remembering the rite of Passover is as acceptable to the Holy One as doing it. If one is able to offer the Passover offering one should do so but now that it is not possible to offer the sacrifice, by celebrating the Seder (and remembering it), it is as good as actually offering the sacrifice. Thus, the Holy One considers it as good as actually fulfilling the commandment if circumstances make it impossible to do so. Therefore, we say, next year when we hope to be in the land of Israel we will offer the sacrifices according to all the details of the law.
There are two things that prevent us from observing the Passover sacrifice. The first thing preventing us is living in exile outside of the land of Israel. But even if we are in the land of Israel, if we are still living under the subjugation of other nations, it would still be impossible for us to rebuild the Temple and to make the sacrifice. This is the second thing preventing us from observing the pesach offering. These two obstacles, exile and our inability to rebuild the Temple, are mentioned in this passage: \"Now we are here\" and \"Now we are slaves.\"
The first part of this passage is in Aramaic (Now we are…) while the second part of the passage is in Hebrew (Next year may we…) The word shanah, year, is used because it comes from the same root as the word shanuy, change. We hope that the year will pass with all its changes. It is more appropriate to refer to this year with the Aramaic hashata.*The word Hashata implies that this is how we are right now but we hope our condition will change even sooner than next year. Why should we wait until next year to return to the land of Israel and rebuild the Temple? This word can also mean \"now\" in Aramaic. We should not say, \"This year we are here; this year we are slaves.\" We hope that we will merit to cease being slaves and return to the land of Israel even sooner and not next year. Hashata, now, is more immediate than hashana, this year." + ] + ], + "Four Questions": [], + "We Were Slaves in Egypt": [ + [], + [ + "Coincidence and Divine Intention
The Mishnah Pesahim 10:4 states:
One begins an account of the Exodus with shame and one concludes with glory, and expounds from “My father was a wandering Aramean” until he completes the whole passage.
The Talmud comments: \"What is meant by shame?\" Rav said: one begins: ‘Originally our ancestors were idolaters’; while Samuel said: we begin: ‘We were slaves.’\" (Pesahim 116a) It is not appropriate to begin the story of the Exodus with glory without first speaking of Israel's degradation. If one immediately speaks of the glory, it might appear the Exodus was a matter of good fortune and that it wasn’t the intention of the One who acted to perform this kind act.
There are two types of acts: those that happen by coincidence and those that happen intentionally. An example of coincidence would be the following: one's house caught fire and coincidentally, it began to rain, putting out the fire. When the rain fell at the right time, it is a lucky coincidence. An intentional act would be the following: a person is passing by when he sees a house on fire and immediately runs over and puts out the fire. This is an intentional act on the part of the person who made a decision to act. *Which is the greater miracle or at least a sign of a divine act?
1. Your house catches fire. At just that moment it rains, putting out the fire.
2. A house catches fire. The fire department responds and in time to put out the fire.
Conventional wisdom is that the rain was a miracle. According to the Maharal the rain was not a miracle; it was lucky coincidence. The second act, on the other hand, was intentional and a sign of God's loving concern and compassion. This sounds counterintuitive. The Maharal differentiates between coincidence and a conscious act of will by God. The first is a poel bamikra, a coincidental act, while number two is a poel baetzem, an intentional act of will.
If one began by speaking of the Exodus without first mentioning Israel's misfortune, one might think that the redemption of the people of Israel came about through a coincidence. One begins by speaking of Israel's misfortune so that others understand it was through the will of the Holy One that the act of redemption was carried out to save Israel from misfortune. An intentional act (poel ba'etzem) is an act of God which is performed with the intention of saving Israel from shame or misfortune.
When an act of glory is preceded by an act of shame, then the glory is that much greater, just as the night that precedes the day makes the day seem so much brighter. Perfection is not found at the beginning in this world and only afterwards does it become apparent. It is impossible at first for there to be wholeness; in the beginning there does not appear to be the exalted divine level. Therefore, divine intervention is preceded by degradation (genut) and in the end it rises up to the level of divinity.
We now can understand the reason for the controversy between Rav and Samuel. According to Rav who said, \"At first our ancestors worshipped idols,\" this is the genut, degradation, since the worship of idols cleaves to the soul. The body is not made inferior by worshipping idols but the soul is. According to Rav the soul is degraded by idolatry and this causes the annihilation of the soul. The soul comes from the realm of holiness and it loses its holiness through the worship of idols, as is stated, \"the same soul will I destroy from among his people.\" (Lev. 23:30) Since idolatry leads to complete destruction of the soul, it should be considered the greater form of genut, degradation.
Samuel is of the opinion that the greatest form of shame is the physical shame which clings to the body. Such degradation is that which is connected to one’s physical being. Therefore, he says the worst degradation is contained in the passage, \"We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt.\" Because the body is material and degradation is more likely to cling to it while the soul is spiritual so genut, degradation, cannot cling to it.
Actually, God redeemed the people of Israel from the degradation of the body and the soul. At first, they worshipped idols (so they experienced degradation of the soul) and then God redeemed them from slavery (the degradation of the body). Rav and Samuel did not disagree about this but they differed about which form of degradation was worse. They felt that whichever was the worst form of degradation should be mentioned first.
One might argue that even though Rav believed the spiritual degradation was the worst form of genut, one should still begin, \"We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt,\" since one should begin with the Exodus. Everything up to \"At first our ancestors worshipped idols\" was an introduction explaining why we are obligated to tell the story of the Exodus. We see, then, the Haggadah accords with the opinions of both Rav and Samuel.", + "Punishment and Threat
“The Lord our God took us out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm.” A mighty hand can mean with great strength, while an outstretched arm could mean continuing threat. That is, the Egyptians would continue to be threatened even after the plague took place for quite some time. God took the Israelites out of Egypt by smiting the Egyptians and by continuing to threaten them afterwards. Each time the plague ended, Pharaoh immediately began to sin once again so that it wasn’t possible to take the Israelites out of Egypt. The only way to free them was to threaten the Egyptians long enough to make sure the Israelites had a chance to leave Egypt. The plague of the first born lasted only a single moment at midnight; it was only the possibility that the plague might continue that the Israelites were able to leave Egypt. Explaining the passage, \"He called for Moses and Aaron at night and said, 'Rise up and get out from among my people,'\" (Ex.12:31) the Midrash states,*The verses in the Torah suggest that after the tenth plague, the Egyptians were terrified that the tenth plague would continue. If they had not been afraid of the Israelites they might have changed their minds immediately after the death of the first born. It was the continuing threat that allowed the Israelites to wait until morning to leave. The Israelites argued that if they left in the middle of the night they would appear to be no better than thieves who run away after robbing someone. Remember the Israelites went around collecting silver and gold before leaving Egypt. \"The Israelites said, 'Are we thieves? We will leave in the morning.' Pharaoh said to them, Shall all Egypt die, as it is stated, The Egyptians urged the people that they might send them with haste for they said, 'We shall all be dead men.' (Ex. 12:33) The Israelites then said to Pharaoh: 'Do you want to end the plague? Declare that we are now free and are now servants of God.' Pharaoh then declared, 'In the past you were the slaves of Pharaoh; from now on you are the servants of God.'\" In this Midrash we see that Pharaoh was terrified because he thought that the plague would continue and everyone in Egypt would die. That is why he agreed to send the Israelites out of Egypt. The continuing threat was an example of the outstretched arm. Pharaoh feared that if he went back on his word the plague would return.", + "Birthing a Nation: From Potential to Actuality
“If the Holy One had not taken our ancestors out of Egypt then we, our children and our children's children would still be subjugated to Pharaoh.” One should not say that even if God had not taken us out of Egypt we might have been freed in some other fashion in future generations. This would not have been the case. If God had not taken us out of Egypt, we would have been subjugated to them forever. The reason that we could only be redeemed by the Holy One is a deep matter. This matter is explained by a passage in the Talmud: \"Rabbi Jochanan said: There are three keys that the Holy One blessed be He has retained in His own hands and not entrusted to any messenger, namely, the key of rain, the key of childbirth, and the key of the revival of the dead.\" (Ta'anit 2a) A verse is brought for each to prove that only God can free them from these three things. Regarding the key of rain, Scripture states, \"The Lord shall open to you His good treasure, the heaven to give the rain to your land in its season.\" (Deut. 28:12) Regarding childbirth Scripture states: \"God remembered Rachel… and opened her womb.\" (Gen 30:22) And regarding resurrection, Scripture states, \"And you shall know that I am the Lord when I have opened your graves.\" (Ezek. 37:13) This proves that these extraordinary matters would not have come about without the One who had the power to act: the Lord.
What do these three things have in common? They are all matters in which there is movement from potential to actuality. Something cannot go from potential to actuality*There are two key words in this passage: koach, potential or becoming, and poal, actuality or being. Without God's active involvement in the creative process, everything is in a state of potential; it is in a state of becoming whole but has not reached the state of wholeness. except through that Being who is completely ‘being.’ Only the Divine is absolute being. Childbirth cannot happen without the divine because it represents a move from potential to actuality. Similarly, resurrection is a similar process that leads from death to life. Rain brings about the vitality of the world upon which human life depends and so represents the move to actuality. That is why in these three cases Scripture uses the language of \"opening\" for these creative processes. Other things, such as the blossoming of a tree and other natural phenomena, are not complete creations (they are constantly in a state of becoming and are never fully created). Since they are not whole, they are never in a state of actuality (poal). Only those things in this world which the Divine brings forth can be in a state of actuality and wholeness. That is why each of them has its own special opening through which it moves from potential to actuality through God.
When Israel was enslaved in Egypt, the Holy One took the people from a state of potential to actuality so that they could go forth of their own volition. They were similar to a fetus in its mother's womb, as the Midrash stated elsewhere. When Israel went forth from Egypt they were like a new born baby who entered the world. Therefore, this process was only process could only happen through the will of the Holy One. This was not the case with all the other times of exile of the Jewish people. Even before the Jewish people went forth from Babylonia they were no longer in a state of potential (koach). This was only the case when they were in Egypt and were not yet a nation. While they were in Egypt they grew more populous just as a fetus grows in the womb.*The fetus grows in its mother’s womb but it is not yet an infant until it emerges into the world. Similarly, the people of Israel were not yet a nation as long as they were in the womb of Egypt. The Exodus from Egypt was considered a move toward actuality and reality. These matters are extremely deep….", + "Four Types of Knowledge
“Even if we are all wise, all discerning…” The Haggadah uses four terms for the four types of knowledge: wise, discerning, experienced (elders), and those who know Torah. The first type of knowledge, referred to as chacham, contains basic principles, such as, \"two opposites cannot coexist in a single subject,\" or, \"the whole is greater than the parts.\" This is called wisdom. The second type of knowledge consists of secondary principles. These principles are derived from axiomatic ideas. This is referred to by the term navon, discerning, as in the statement, \"Who is discerning; one who derives one matter from another.\" (Chagigah 14a, Isa. 3:3) The third type of knowledge, referred to as zaken, is acquired through experiences that are repeated many times. For example a person might state, ‘when A happens then B will result.’ Or, ‘When a person eats certain herbs they cause a person to experience heat or coolness. *These are not quotes from another work but rather statements based on the scientific process of observation and conclusion. This person acquires knowledge through experience. Elders tend to have this type of knowledge; through their age, they are able to deduce certain facts. And there is received knowledge which one receives from a trustworthy person whose knowledge one trusts. One receives such Torah knowledge through the words of Moses our teacher who is called the faithful one of the Holy One. This is referred to by the expression, \"those who know Torah.\"
This is the explanation of our version of the text, \"Even if we are all wise, if we are discerning, if we are elders and if we know the Torah…\" There is another version of this text that only mentions three, \"Even if we are all wise, even if we are discerning, and even if we know in the Torah.\" It does not mention, \"if we are elders.\" This is the correct version of the text. Certainly the Haggadah only mentioned three types of knowledgeable parallel to the three types of knowledge mention with regard to Bezalel, \"And I have filled him with….wisdom, understanding, and knowledge.\" (Ex. 31:2) 'Wisdom' refers to axiomatic principles; 'understanding' refers to information that is derived from these principles; and 'knowledge' refers to information that one attains according to his ability. Thus when the Haggadah says, \"even if one knows the Torah,\" it is referring to the truth of Torah that has been taught to us according to our capacity." + ] + ], + "Story of the Five Rabbis": [ + [ + "The Uniqueness of Passover Night
“It once happened that Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Yehoshua, Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah, Rabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Tarfon gathered together (misubin) in B'nai Brak.” The sages bring this story to show us how much the sages loved to tell the story of the Exodus from Egypt and why it was necessary to tell the story while gathering around the table in B'nai Brak. Lest one assume that they were doing so for the sake of learning in general and not because it was Passover night, the Haggadah says that they were \"leaning\" *Leaning: The word misubin appears in the four questions: On all other nights we eat sitting or leaning (misubin); tonight all of us lean. By the middle ages leaning became a custom associated with the celebration of Passover eve, since leaning was the stance taken by the wealthy and rich. Thus when the Haggadah says that they were \"leaning\" it can only mean they were celebrating Passover. In the Greco-Roman world however, it was customary for the free born to lean on couches when they ate. The custom was adopted by Jews in celebration of Passover and soon became separated from its original cultural and social milieu in the Greco-Roman world. (misubin) in B'nai Brak. If they were doing so for the simple purpose of learning Torah, it would have said that they were learning in the Beit Midrash.
One should not assume that they were causing themselves discomfort by staying up all night on the festival. *A festival should be a time of physical pleasure. Staying up all night would have been physically exhausting so that it might not have been considered to be in the spirit of the festival. For these rabbis, however, the joy of spending the night telling the story of the Exodus would have been so exhilarating they would not have realized that the morning had arrived. Because they so loved performing this commandment it seemed like a short period of time to them and they didn’t even realize that dawn had arrived. As a result the students had to come and inform them that it was time for them to recite the morning Sh'ma." + ], + [ + "The Importance of Remembering the Exodus
Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said: *This passage is taken from the first chapter of the Mishnah Berachot. It is actually about whether there is an obligation to recite the third paragraph of the Sh’ma. Since we are not obligated to wear fringes at night, we may be exempt from reciting this passage. But since it also mentions the Exodus, Rabbi Elazar concludes that the obligation to recite it and mention the Exodus even at night. This passage is brought here even though this statement does not address the commandment of telling the Exodus from Egypt on Passover. Rather it addresses the question of mentioning the Exodus in the Kriyat Sh'ma every night. It is to show how important the commandment of remembering the Exodus is. According to the sages one is obligated to mention the Exodus each day and according to Rabbi Elazar, one is obligated to mention the Exodus every day and every night. How much more should one remember the Exodus on the night that it took place. Further, the fact that the sages say that we are obligated to mention the Exodus as part of the Sh'ma even in the Messianic era teaches us we will still be required to tell the story of the Exodus on the night that it took place even in the Messianic era.
This teaches us how important remembering the Exodus is: even in the Messianic era we must not forget the Exodus.", + "Remember the Exodus, All the Days of Your life
“Until Ben Zoma explained it from the verse, In order that you may remember…all the days of your life.\" (Deut. 16:3) Ben Zoma used this verse as a proof text for reciting the Sh'ma at night even though it deals with the Passover offering. The previous verse states, \"You shall slaughter the Passover offering for the Lord your God from the flock or the herd…\" (Deut. 16:2) Without remembering the Passover rite on the day it took place, there can be no true remembrance of the Exodus. Mentioning the Exodus daily in the Sh'ma, is not sufficient for inspiring remembrance. The true essence of the Exodus is in celebrating the Passover offering on the eve of Passover. *The Maharal wonders why this verse was chosen as a proof text to explain why the Exodus must be mentioned daily (and according to Rabbi Elazar, nightly as well). The passage in Deuteronomy, Chapter 16 actually deals with offering the Passover sacrifice and not the commandment to tell the story of the Exodus. Mentioning the Exodus, however, is not the same as actually reenacting and remembering the Exodus. Only through the annual commemoration of the Exodus are we able to recall the Exodus throughout the year. In these verses the offering leads to remembering the Exodus, \"All the days of your life.\"
Now that we have remembered the Passover offering, we go on to say that a person should remember the Exodus every day of his life through the recitation of the Sh'ma. The statement \"All the days of your life,\" is interpreted to mean that one must mention it not just in the daytime but at night as well. The sages, however, interpret this passage differently, taking it as a reference to the Messianic era.
Why didn’t the sages interpret \"All the days of your life,\" the same way as Rabbi Elazar? Why did it make more sense to Rabbi Elazar to take this as inclusive of the nights rather than agreeing with the sages who understood it as adding the Messianic era? It would seem that Rabbi Elazar understood the nights as essential to the Exodus since the transformative miracle took place at night while the Exodus actually happened during the day. Therefore, it was fitting to mention the Exodus both in the daytime and at night.
The sages, on the other hand, felt that redemption happened during the day and not at night. *This fits with the Maharal's earlier statement that the essence of the Exodus is the Exodus itself and not the miracles or the plagues. He would agree with the sages who appear to conclude that we only mention the Exodus at night on the occasion when the events took place and not the rest of the year. The final plague was merely the means of allowing the Israelites to leave Egypt during the day. That is why we are only obligated to mention the Exodus in the day time. We do not mention the Exodus at night, at the time when the final plague took place. We only focus on the final plague on the eve of Passover when we celebrate the holiday.
Certainly we must mention the Exodus on Passover night since it was the time when the miracle took place." + ] + ], + "The Four Sons": [ + [ + "The Four Blessings
Baruch HaMakom: Why praise God as the “Giver of Torah” in connection with the four types of children of which the Torah speaks? This passage can be explained as follows: The Torah mentions many important principles in the Torah does not elaborate on them. Yet we see that the One who gave us the Torah did not skimp in giving an answer to each of the four children.
The repetition of the expression Baruch HaMakom, Baruch hu represents an additional blessing before and after mentioning the name of God. Similarly, Baruch sh’natan Torah l’amo Yisrael Baruch hu, represent a blessing before and after the name of God. This is in fulfillment of the words of the Zohar: Torah and the Kadosh Baruch Hu are one. *The word Torah appears before and after HaMakom, a name of God, and Torah. Like the name of God, Torah is a name of God and should be preceded and followed by a blessing. The reference to the Zohar is from Parshat Acharei Mot. However the full statement is “God, Torah and Israel are One.” The name Makom, literally “The Place,” is a common expression used in rabbinic literature for God. God is the place of the world.", + "The Four Children: The Questions
The Torah speaks of four children: One must explain the meaning of the number four with regard to the four children. Also why does the Haggadah speak of wise and wicked rather than righteous and wicked? Furthermore why is the wicked mentioned before the simple child?
Rather, the four children represent four types of learners.
1. There is the wise child (the self-motivated learner) who seeks out wisdom and knowledge in order to understand those things he has not learned. He is constantly acquiring new knowledge. He is called a chakham because he is constantly acquiring chokhma, wisdom. *In other words, the wise child isn’t inherently wise but he is constantly pursuing knowledge and wisdom.
2. The simple learner does not have more or less knowledge than the chakham. Rather, he asks questions only when he notices anything that is different or out of the ordinary. This is the definition of the simplest knowledge which is neither lacking nor additional. It only occurs to him to ask questions when he notices something different. *The simple child is intelligent but he is not curious. This child is motivated to ask by outside criteria and stimuli rather than an inner process of thinking and contemplation.
3. The one who doesn’t ask lacks knowledge and fails to ask questions even when he notices something out of the ordinary. He is certainly lacking and is therefore called the one who doesn’t even know how to ask questions. *There are four verses in scripture which command us to tell our children the story of the Exodus. Three of them are prefaced with a question and then three is an accompanying answer. In Exodus, 13:8) we are simply told, “You shall tell your child on that day…” The sages interpret this verse as a reference to a child who fails to even ask question, or possibly is incapable of asking because he is too young or suffers from some type of a cognitive delay. Interestingly the response to this child is also given to the wicked child, which could be understood as an insult: “God did this for me and not for you.” Ex. 13:8 is actually the key verse among these four since it contains the word v’higadita, the bases for Haggadah.
4. Finally there is the one who is the opposite of the wise child who has a source of knowledge and understanding. He, however, uses his knowledge for evil to ask questions that lead to heresy. He is called wicked because he is wicked in his wisdom seeking knowledge that will lead to heresy. Anyone whose actions lead to evil is called a rasha.
The four children are four types of learners; there are no others besides these: whether he increases his wisdom, is complete in his knowledge, is lacking in his wisdom, or if he uses his wisdom for negative means. There are those who pursue wisdom to become enlightened and those who pursue knowledge for the purpose of heresy. That is why the wise and the wicked are paired up first. They are opposites with the same knowledge.
The wise child asks a question about all the commandments while the wicked child asks specifically about Passover offering. The simple child asks a question regarding breaking the neck of a first born animal, *“But every firstling ass you must redeem with a sheep; if you do not redeem it you must break its neck. And you must redeem every first born male among your children. And when in time to come, your son asks you, ‘What is this?’ you shall say to him, ‘It was with a mighty hand that the Lord brought us out from Egypt…” (Exodus 13:13-14) The simple child’s question appears in the context dealing with the redemption of first born animals and children. If an ass is not redeemed, its neck must be broken. and the one who doesn’t know how to ask, his answer appears in the context of the Seder and unleavened bread. Each one is mentioned in a context most fitting for his intellectual needs.
Since the one who doesn’t know how to ask lacks the most basic knowledge of Passover, we must arouse his interest so that he is credited with the commandment of telling the story of the Exodus. The Torah places his statement in conjunction with the matzah so that we can tell him the whole story of the Exodus, as the sages say: “You shall say to him, ‘It is because of this’ – you shall say it at the time when matzah and the maror are placed before you.”
The simple one asks of his own volition but only when he notices something that surprises him. If he doesn’t notice something different, then he doesn’t ask. That is why the Torah sets his question in connection with the custom of breaking the neck of the first born ass that is not redeemed. It doesn’t make sense to break the neck of a perfectly good animal – this is out of the ordinary. Regarding this strange act, the simple child would ask, “what is this?” We also need to do things differently on Passover eve so that the child will see this and ask about it. The question in the Torah, “What is this,” isn’t specifically connected to the breaking of the neck of the ass but to any action which is out of the ordinary and inspires the child to ask a question. When the child sees the pesach offering, matzah and the maror, which are not ordinary practices, the child is likely to ask.
The wise child doesn’t need something out of the ordinary to inspire him to ask; he asks questions out of a natural sense of curiosity. The Torah every type of commandment in his question since the wise child wants to know why God commanded it. If the Torah had placed his question in connection only with the Passover Seder, one might think that he only asks when he sees something special. The wise child doesn’t need something out of the ordinary to ask questions.
The wicked child asks about the Passover offering. He refers to the sacrifice as avodah, divine service, as it is written: “And it shall come to pass, when you come to the land, you shall observe this divine service (avodah)…and “when your children shall say to you, what is this service (avodah) to you?” The wicked child asks about the avodah but then rejects it. When he asks on Passover eve, he does so because he considers these commandments to be avodah,*Avodah can refer to the temple service, ritual in general, or it can refer to labor or slavery. When the wicked child refers to the rituals of Passover as Avodah he is implying that it is a burden. hard work (and not because he thinks about it as services of God) and doesn’t want to be bothered. The four are distinguished from one another by the type of question they ask on the anniversary of the Exodus.
We see that the four children are different from one another in their question on Passover night. The wise one asks from the perspective of the wisdom in the practice. He asks about all the commandments and not this one in particular, as has been explained. The simple only asks when he notices something out of the ordinary. He asks when he notices something different on Passover night in the Passover offering, matzah and the maror. The wicked one asks because he sees the rituals not as service/avodah, but as an avodah/burden and so he rejects the commandments with his question. Each one, then, offers his question in a more fitting context and not just about the celebration of Passover on which one is obligated to tell the story.
We learn about the obligation to tell the story of the Exodus on Passover eve from the one who does not know how to ask. It is based on the obligation to tell the story and not on the question that is asked. One must tell the story on Passover eve. The one who asks has permission to ask wherever he sees fit. There is no obligation to answer questions on Passover eve but to make the story of the Exodus known. *Ex 13:8 - You shall tell (v’higadita) your child on that day, ‘It is because of this which the Lord did for me when I went for from Egypt.’” This is the basis of the Haggadah. The Maharal points out that we are obligated to make the story of the Exodus known on Passover eve even when the child asks no questions. Questions should be answered whenever they are asked whether on Passover or throughout the year. The other three questions aren’t necessarily relevant to Passover but to any time a child asks." + ], + [ + "The Four Questions: The Answers
One should further examine the answers given to the four children found in the Torah. The answer to the wise child in the Haggadah is the not the one found in the Torah. The Torah states, “You shall say to your children, “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt and Adonai freed us from Egypt with a mighty hand… then the Lord commanded us to observe all these laws.” (Deut. 6:21-24) The answer in the Haggadah is completely different from the one in the Torah. Also it is not clear why the answer in the Haggadah focuses on the law: “One may not eat anything after the Passover offering.”
The answer that the Torah gives to the wicked child is also difficult. The Torah states, \"You shall say, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the Lord because He passed over the house of the Israelites in Egypt when He smote the Egyptians, but saved our houses.’” (Ex. 12:26) Instead the Haggadah focuses on a different verse (the one which is given to the child who does not know how to ask), “It is because of this which the Lord did for me…” (Ex. 13:8) Further, what is the sin of the child who does not know how to ask? The answer given to the silent child begins, “It is because of this which the Lord did for me...” This implies that God did it for someone else but not for him.
Furthermore, the wise child also says, “Which the Lord our God commanded You?” Why do we interpret the question of the wicked child, “for you” but not “for him,” but we do not interpret the question of the wise child, “who commanded you,” similarly?
Finally, why do the answers to the wise and the wicked children contain the expression v’af atta, “and additionally you (shall say to him)?” The answers to the simple child and the one who does not know how to ask does not contain tis expression.
This is the intent of the interpreter of the Haggadah: the Torah’s answer to the wise child, “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt…” is not essentially an answer to his question. This child wants to know about all the “testimonies, statutes, and ordinances.” He wants to fully understand the significance of all the commandments in the Torah. He already knows about the story of exile and redemption. The main part of the answer to this child is found afterwards, “then Adonai commanded us to observe all these laws and to revere Adonai, our God.” Because he is a wise child, he knows that “All these laws” include the laws of Passover whether contained in the written Torah or in the Oral tradition. “Give instruction to the wise and he will grow wiser.” (Prov. 9:9) “We were slaves” is merely the beginning of the answer and the reason that God gave us all the laws of Passover.”
The wise child knows the reasons for Passover, so we say to him, Af attah, “Additionally you are commanded not to eat after the Passover offering…” Since he wishes to add to his understanding all the laws of Passover, we do not hold back, teaching every last law of Passover, just as the verse in the Torah stated, “All these laws.” The Haggadah chose to mention the very last law among the laws of Passover, “One may not eat anything after the Passover offering.”*The very last Mishnah of chapter ten in Pesachim contains the statement “One may not eat anything after the Passover offering.” This is not only the final statement in the Mishnah but also the last law in the observance of Passover. This implies that one must teach this child everything regarding Passover from beginning to end.
When the wise child says, “Which the Lord our God commanded you - etchem,” he is not excluding himself from the community of faith, like he wicked child who says, “to you,” lachem. Just the opposite. He includes himself in acting the of God’s sovereignty when he says, “The Lord our God.” When he uses the word etchem (commanded you) and not otanu (commanded us), he speaks wisely. For God gave the commandments to his ancestors who went forth from Egypt, and they received the commandments for themselves and their offspring for all time. Therefore he says, “commanded you.” The wise child is speaking to those who were adults when he was still a minor (and not yet commanded). When he reached the age of adulthood he asked his father to teach him what God had commanded him and his offspring after him to do. This is a fitting explanation – it is not necessary to offer overly complicated explanations.
The wicked child, on the other hand, speaks with derision when he says, “What is this rite to you (lachem)?” In other words, “what is this important to you?” or “what do you gain from doing this?” By asking in this way he removes himself from this community of faith because he doesn’t want to bother himself with rituals; they are of little importance in his eyes.
That is why when we answer the wicked child, we begin with the expression, af atta.*Just as he asks caustically give him a caustic answer. The expression af attah implies that we must answer these two children in a way that goes beyond the literal answer that the Torah gives. Just as he continues to mock others who perform these rituals, hoping others will become sinners, af attah, so too should you add to the Torah’s answer by saying, “It is the Passover sacrifice to the Lord,” and thereby set his teeth on edge by stating the verse that is used for the one who does not know how to ask. In this way you answer him measure for measure. Answer him in the same manner that he answer you. He said “You and not me;” you answer him by saying, “Me and not you.” This is the meaning of af atta, “In addition you should say…” In addition to what the Torah says you should also say…
For the simple child and the one who does not know how to ask, one does not have to say af atta “in addition you should say,” because we do not add anything to the answer which the Torah gives. Just recite the verse that is found in the Torah.
Why do we speak to the child who does not know how to ask in the same way we speak to the wicked child? He is not so different from the wicked child; he appears to reject his connection to the community of Israel. He has not yet become cynical nor is he trying to cause others to sin like the wicked one. The fact that he does not ask questions regarding the commandments, however, suggests that he doesn’t feel a sense of connection to the commandments. By answering him, “It is because of this which the Lord did for me,” we hope to increase his desire to accept the commandments and to recognize the great power in them since it was through them that we experienced redemption. If he listens, fine. And if he doesn’t than he is no better than the wicked child; if he had been in Egypt he would not have been redeemed. Now we have explained the matter of the four children." + ] + ], + "Yechol Me'rosh Chodesh": [ + [ + "Rosh Chodesh: The Perfect Moment of Redemption
It might have been thought that the obligation to tell the story of the Exodus was at the beginning of the month: We have already explained that Israel’s redemption took place on the highest divine level outside of realm of time. It was fitting that it should occur on the first day of the new month. *Passover occurs on the fifteenth of the month – at the time of the full moon. The holiday is connected, then, to the natural cycles of time. The Maharal suggests that the redemption from Egypt was a timeless event and not part of the natural cycles of time and nature. As a result it should have occurred on the new moon – when “time” begins and the moon is absent from the sky. The fifteenth of the month becomes a historic moment that arises again and again in the history of the people of Israel.
The Midrash states that from the time that the Holy One created the world, God set the times for the beginning of the months and the years. And from the time that God chose Jacob and his sons, the Holy One set the month of redemption in which they would be redeemed from Egypt. It was in that month that Jacob would receive his blessings, in which Israel was eventually be redeemed, in which Isaac would be born and would be bound on the altar. In that month there would be a hint that it would be the month of salvation, as it is stated: “This month shall be the beginning of months for you, the beginning of all months of the year.” (Ex. 12:2) From this it is proven that redemption should occur on the first moment of the first month since it is singular and not connected to the continuity of time. That is why the sages suggest that one might assume that the obligation of telling the story should be on Rosh Chodesh, the beginning of the new month. Therefore, the sages interpret the verse to mean that even though you might have thought we should begin telling the story of the Exodus at the beginning of the month of Nisan that is not the case. The essence of the commandment to tell the story does not begin until the redemption was completed (in the middle of the month)." + ] + ], + "In the Beginning Our Fathers Were Idol Worshipers": [ + [ + "Israel’s Spiritual Journey to Egypt
Originally, our ancestors worshipped idols. This passage comes to state why God chose to bring Abraham and his descendants closer to Him and why God chose them over others. What significant was this choice if there were no other worthy nations aat that time There were other choices: there were Abraham and Nachor, and God chose Abraham. There were Isaac, Ishmael, and Abraham’s other offspring and God chose Isaac. God gave Isaac, Jacob and Esau, and then God chose Jacob and his children. Three times God chose to refine and choose one from the others until there was a truly pure and holy genetic line*Tipa kedosha u’berurah, literally “a holy and pure drop.” The word is used in Pirkei Avot for semen. Apparently, the Maharal is known for some of his politically incorrect genetic theories about Israel’s uniqueness. Choice here means that Abraham and his descendants had to go through a process of purification and refining in order to be truly worthy. that does not contain any waste. Jacob and his sons were chosen because they were three times purified and were without any waste.
Having already mentioned the physical shame, (“We were slaves in Egypt,”) the text goes on to explain the spiritual shame that Israel had to overcome, since both forms of shame were found in Israel: material and spiritual. The Holy One then lifted them up from shame to exaltation.
The verse states, “Jacob and his offspring went down to Egypt,” even though later it states that they went down forced by divine decree. *This verse suggests that Jacob and his family went down to Egypt of their own volition – contradicting the later statement. It should have said here that Jacob and his offspring were made to go down to Egypt. This is not problematic since certainly it was a divine decree that Jacob and his family went down to Egypt. However, the Holy One gave them good reason to down to Egypt – they went down with honor at Joseph’s request." + ], + [], + [ + "“Praised is the One who kept His promise to Israel.” The promise which the Holy One made to Abraham resulted in God protecting us from our enemies just as God continued to protect our ancestors from their enemies. This promise is connected to the statement that “One must begin the story of the Exodus with shame.” If someone were to ask, why wasn’t Israel destroyed when they were in Egypt, one could answer, “Praised is the Holy One who calculated the time of redemption.” Since God had calculated the exact time of redemption, if the people of Israel had been destroyed (God forbid), the redemption could not have come about. We continue to be the recipients of this promise made at the Covenant of the Pieces, in which the Holy One showed Abraham the subjugation of his descendants to the nations until the final redemption.", + "Sin and Suffering
As it says: “Know for a certainty that your seed shall be a stranger in a land not theirs, and they shall enslave and inflict them for four hundred years…and afterwards they shall go forth with great wealth:” (Gen. 15:13) This verse teaches us that God decreed, exile*Exile: the Hebrew word here is geirut. A ger in biblical Hebrew is someone who lives as an outsider and is therefore not protected by the laws of the land. The people of Israel may have lived comfortably in their first years in Egypt but they were still outsiders, gerim, and not considered true citizens in the land. Isaac was born in the land of Canaan but because it was not yet under the authority of Abraham, he and his offspring would have been considered outsiders and strangers. Consider what Abraham says when he buys a burial site for his wife: “I am a stranger (ger) and a resident among you…” (Gen. 23:4), enslavement, and oppression on the offspring of Abraham. Exile means they were to live in the domain of others. In addition to living in the land of others, they would be enslaved in the way that a slave must serve his master. And in addition to the subjugation, they would also be oppressed. This is even worse than subjugation since generally speaking, a master does not oppress his servant. It would appear, then, that three decrees were made against the offspring of Abraham, one after the other: exile, enslavement and oppression. With each decree, the exile became worse.
From the birth of Isaac until the death of the final sons of Jacob, they were in exile. From the death of the sons until the birth of Miriam they were enslaved. And from the birth of Miriam they were oppressed – this began 86 years before the Exodus. That is why Miriam received her name, from the word mar, bitter. However, why did God make these three decrees? The answer is found in B. Nedarim 32a:
Rabbi Abahu said in Rabbi Eleazar's name: Why was our Father Abraham punished and his children doomed to servitude for two hundred and ten years? Because he pressed scholars into his militia service, as it is written, “He armed his dedicated servants born in his own house.” *Rabbi Abahu understood “dedicated servants” as referring to Abraham’s disciples who came to study with him. (Gen 14:14) Samuel said: Because he went too far in testing the promises of God, as it is written, “Whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it? (Gen. 15:8) *By asking for a sign as reassurance from God, he showed a lack of faith. Rabban Jochanan said: Because he prevented men from entering the covenant, as it is written, “And the king of Sodom said it to Abraham, ‘Give me the persons, and take the goods for yourself.’” (Gen. 14:21) *Rabban Jochanan suggests that by allowing the King of Sodom to keep the people, Abraham missed out on an opportunity to teach all the people he saved about God’s existence.
There are three explanations for Israel’s exile and all of them are based on Abraham’s sin. Everything extends from the root cause. If there is something faulty in the root, that fault will extend forth to everything that comes from the root. That is why this verse is connected to all the exiles of Israel – not just to Egypt but to all the other nations to which the Jewish people were subjugated. They would not have been possible if it hadn’t been for Abraham’s transgressions. The sages make this point by interpreting the word v’gam – “And also (v’gam) *In classic midrashic style the word v’gam is interpreted as adding something additional to our understanding because the word is superfluous. It suggests that this is a prophecy not only about Egypt but about all the other oppressive nations as well. the nation that you served will I judge.”
If Abraham had been among those who went down to Egypt, then it would have been necessary to include Ishmael and Esau among those who are went down to Egypt. Therefore, God enacted that the decree should take place after Ishmael and Esau had been separated from Jacob and his children. Even though the punishment was for Abraham, he could not be among those who went down to Egypt so that eventually the land would only be given to the descendants of Jacob.
Rabbi Abahu was of the opinion that Abraham was punished because he did not completely trust God when he pursued the four kings who made war on Sodom and Gomorrah. (Gen. 14) He forced his students to join his militia and brought them to war because he was afraid of being defeated. *Could it be that Abraham thought that by having God fearing soldiers he was more likely to succeed? He appears to have thought by having his God fearing students with him God was more likely to protect him. Taking unfit soldiers into battle in order to gain God’s protection is showing a lack of trust in God. Taking better prepared soldiers (instead of his disciples), would not have been a transgression since one should not depend on miracles when going to war. Abraham should have trusted God to be with him rather than stacking the deck in his favor. That is why his offspring were subjugated for four hundred years so that by seeing God’s might, they would come to have complete faith in God.
Samuel was of the opinion that Abraham lacked faith when he questioned whether God will send him an heir. The sin was that he said, “Whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it? (Gen. 15:8) This, however, was not a lack of trust in God (God forbid), because Abraham knew that he was destined to receive the land from God. Rather he was afraid that he was not worthy of meriting the right to receive the land from the standpoint of justice. Therefore, he asked for a sign from God to prove that he was worthy asking, “Whereby shall I know?” Because of this, his offspring had to spend four hundred years in exile so that they would learn to put their trust in God, as it is written, “They trusted in God and in Moses His servant.” (Exodus 14:31)
Rabban Jochanan was of the opinion that it is unseemly to suggest that Abraham did not trust God. What he failed to do is to bring more converts beneath the shadow of God’s wings which would have been the way to honor to God. Abraham was slothful in convincing people to have faith in the Blessed One and he didn’t work hard enough to encourage faith. God wanted the divine name to be known throughout the world so all would believe in God. That is why Abraham’s offspring were enslaved for four hundred years. Afterwards they went forth with miracles and wonders so that people came forward to convert and to believe in God, as is stated: “Jethro heard…” (Ex. 19:1)
These three incidents brought Israel to true faith. It is why Abraham’s sin brought so much punishment upon his offspring. It was fitting for Abraham to publicize the existence of God to the world. However it took a transgression to actualize this possibility. For what purpose does the world have if one does not publicize God’s existence in the world? There had to be a sin, even a small one, to bring this about. Also there is no subjugation or suffering without sin. It only took a small transgression to actualize this lesson.
Abraham’s three transgressions brought about the three punishments. Abraham’s descendants were exiled because he pressed the students into militia service. Being a stranger in a foreign land and respect for ones students are connected in the following verse, “You shall rise up before…the elder and fear your God, I am the Lord. And if a stranger sojourns with you…” (Lev. 32:33-34) This is also the case in the Amida: “For the elders of Your people, the house of Israel, for the remnant of your scribes, and for the righteous strangers (gerim) and for us…” For not showing proper respect for the students of Torah, a decree of exile was placed upon Abraham’s offspring.
“They shall be enslaved,” is a reference to the second sin: Abraham sinned by asking for a sign of God’s promise and presuming that he would be judged unworthy of God’s promise.
The oppression came about because Abraham failed to bring more converts to a belief in God. The essence of Israel’s suffering came about because Israel had separated themselves in their faith. This only occurred because they did not bring more people beneath the wings of the Divine Presence and as a result there remained many who opposed Israel." + ], + [], + [ + "God’s Promise and Our Continuity
And it is this (promise) that stood for our ancestors. This statement explains the previous statement, that the promise which God made to Abraham was that our enemies would not destroy us. The promise applied both to our father and also to us, as we explained in our interpretation of the verse, “The nation that subjugated us, I will judge – this was to include…”
It is the custom to lift the cup of wine as you recite this passage. This cup is associated with the second promise which God made, “I will deliver (hitzalti) you from their bondage.” (Ex. 6:6) This cup is called the cup of deliverance and salvation. We need to be aware that this promise of salvation is constant, just like the verse, “I will lift up the cup of salvation and call upon the name of the Lord.” (Ps. 116:13) For in every generation the Holy One saved us from their hands. This is a clear and proper explanation for this custom." + ] + ], + "First Fruits Declaration": [ + [], + [ + "Why Was Laban So Dangerous
Come and learn. See how great God’s promise was.*The verses from Deuteronomy that are the subject of Midrashic interpretation continue the theme of the previous passages. Strangely, the Midrash begins by interpreting arami oved avi as a reference to Laban as another example of someone, “who rose up against Israel and tried to destroy them.” Why Laban was dishonest and he did threaten Jacob, there is nothing explicit in scripture that suggests that he sought to kill him or his family. The suggestion has been made that this passage was written during the Maccabean revolt and that Laban was singled out because he was a distant ancestor of the Syrian Hellenists. During that period of time the Jewish community had reason to see Laban the Aramean/ Syrian as worse than Pharaoh. Others have suggested that Laban the Arami is connected to Rome (notice the similarity in the word) – and that the text hints at the conflict between Rome and Jerusalem. For our enemies were constantly rising up against us to destroy us but the Holy One did not allow them to destroy us. It is necessary to understand why the sages ignored what Esau wanted to do to Jacob and instead began with Laban the Aramean which is never explicitly stated in Scripture. Also, Why did Laban hate Jacob without reason, when he considered Jacob’s sons and daughters to be like his own? Yet according to the Haggadah, Laban sought to destroy all of Jacob’s offspring.
Furthermore, why did the sages magnify the wickedness of Laban’s scheme by saying that Pharaoh only sought to destroy the males and not the females? Scripture states, “The enemy said, ‘I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the plunder, I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them,’” (Ex. 15:9) implying that Pharaoh wanted to destroy all Israel.
This passage reveals many things. Israel’s enemies are not like the adversaries of other nations who oppose their enemies for a reason. Israel has people who hate them without any reason. Who were greater opponents of Israel than Pharaoh and Laban? Even though Israel did nothing to the Egyptians, Pharaoh decreed the death of all the male children. Yet Pharaoh said, “I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy them,” (Ex. 15:9) and it was not entirely without reason. Pharaoh thought that Israel would flee from Egypt and he wanted to bring them back. He was afraid that if they left they might return to wage war on Egypt. This was certainly a reason for hating them.
Laban had no reason to hate Jacob. Jacob had performed favors for Laban and yet Laban pursued him. Laban only made the statement, “The sons are my sons and the daughters are my daughters,” after God changed Laban’s mind in a dream and warned him, “Be careful that you speak not to Jacob neither good nor bad…” (Gen 31:24) If God had not warned him, Laban would not have said that the sons and daughters of Jacob were “his own.” From this we can assume that Laban wished to uproot Jacob’s family entirely, male and female.
This was not the case with Esau who planned to kill Jacob because his brother stole his blessing. That is why the Haggadah mentions Pharaoh and Laban but not Esau.
If one looks more deeply into this matter, one discovers the source of Laban’s hatred. One must know the holy roots of Jacob were above and the root of Laban to which he cleaved was in the lower world. Because their sources are completely the opposite, Laban wanted to destroy “everything.” Scripture attributes to Laban that he wished to destroy Jacob but this is a mysterious matter.*The essences of Jacob and Laban were the opposite one another, so that when they are brought together, they negate one another. To use a metaphor from Star Trek physics, a combination of matter and anti-matter causes a giant explosion and total destruction. Jacob’s essence is the divine while Laban’s essence is of this world and never the twain shall meet. It wasn’t so much what Laban tried to do to Jacob but rather the very proximity of Jacob to Laban that could cause his destruction. What it really means is that since Laban is opposed to Jacob in their essence there is no deed (more destructive) than this. It was only the Holy One who protected Jacob from such annihilation, God forbid. Scripture does not say Arami he’evid avi, “An Aramean sought to destroy my father,” but Arami oved avi. The word oved is an adjective and not a verb, as in the expression even michshol, “a stumbling block.” (Lev. 19:14) *Thus, the verse might be read, “A destroying Aramean pursued my father.” Laban was prepared to bring about the negation of Jacob, if God had not helped our forefather. Even though Scripture never states that God saved Jacob from Laban, it tells us that he went down to Egypt; this is not problematic. By telling us that Jacob went down to Egypt, it implies that God saved him from Laban." + ], + [ + "“He dwelled (vayagar) there, teaching us that he did not go down to settle there.” If Jacob had gone down to Egypt to settle there permanently, this would have negated God’s promise of redemption. As long as they saw themselves as temporary residents, it was known that they would not remain in the land. A ger is someone who is only temporarily settled in a place and will be gone tomorrow. This was how the Israelites saw themselves in Egypt when Jacob went down to Egypt and because of this they were worthy of redemption. The word vayagar was chosen here to show that they did not go down to settle permanently.
Doesn’t the verse already imply that they settled there temporarily? *The word vayagar already implies temporary residence so why do we need another proof text here to prove this? The Maharal suggests that while the original settlers saw themselves as temporary residents, by the time of Moses the people saw themselves as permanent residents. The Egyptians, however, saw the Israelites as gerim and not as citizens. Despite their attitudes, the Israelites merited redemption because of their ancestors and because from the standpoint of the Egyptians they were still outsiders. The Egyptians saw Israel as gerim, as temporary residents, while the Israelites thought of the land as their permanent residence. That is why the Haggadah brings this proof text, “They said to Pharaoh, to dwell in Egypt temporarily we have come for there is no pasture for the flocks of your servants…” (Gen. 47:4) This verse shows that their original intention was not to stay permanently in the land but to dwell temporarily." + ], + [], + [ + "“They became a nation,” teaching that Israel remained distinctive (mitzuyanim).” This passage teaches us that the people of Israel did not become assimilated among the Egyptians so that they were also called Egyptians. Rather they remained distinctive and separate. The word mitzuyanim implies that anyone who saw them immediately knew they were Israelites; eventually they recognized “Israel,” as a separate ethnic group. If they had become assimilated they would have been designated as Egyptians, God forbid, and they would not have been worthy of redemption. Because they stood apart from their neighbors, they were worthy of being taken out of Egypt.", + "The Miraculous Increase of the Israelites
“Great, mighty as Scripture states: ‘The Israelites were fertile and prolific; they multiplied and increased very, very, greatly so that the land was filled with them:” (Ex. 1:7) It is necessary to understand what the sages said regarding this verse in Midrash:
“The Israelites were fertile and prolific: each one gave birth to six in every brood. There are those who say there were twelve twelve. Fertile – two, prolific – two, multiplied – two, increased – two, very, very – two, the land was filled with them – two.*Each of the Hebrew terms describing the fertility of the Israelites is stated in the plural so that they represent two. The Midrashic approach to the text is to take nothing for granted. If a word is plural than it should be read numerically as two or more. There are those who say that sixty were born in every brood! This is not surprising since a scorpion which is a type of crawling creature (sheretz) that gives birth to sixty young.*One of the terms, yishritzu, prolific has the same Hebrew root as the word sheretz, a crawling creature or an insect, allowing the Midrash to compare the Israelites’ fertility to that of the scorpion. Rabbi Natan said: the land was filled with them – they were like the reeds of the field.” (Shemot Rabbah 1:7)
This statement is quite surprising. *Did the Maharal understand this Midrash so literally? He acknowledges that women do not give birth to six children (let alone sixty children) every day and certainly on a regular basis. He searches for a way to interpret this Midrash on its own terms. The Maharal attempts to read aggadah in a metaphorical sense. What is the significance of the number six, neither more or less? What is the reason for the number sixty? Such a thing could happen by chance that a woman could give birth in this number without a reason. Accidental occurrences do not happen constantly, and according to the Midrash, this happened all the time.
This can be explained through another verse: “The more they were oppressed, the more they increased and the more they spread out.” (Ex.1:12) The Midrash explains that the reason for their increase was that they were forced to work six days in a row and only allowed to rest on the Sabbath. This was because as a young man, Moses came to Pharaoh and said, “Is it possible for people to work constantly without a break and an opportunity to rest?” Pharaoh said to him: “Pick one day in the week for the slaves to rest, lest they be unable to continue their work.”*It is often said that marital intimacy is a “double mitzvah” on the Sabbath. Even though the Israelites were given a day off from hard labor, they were still oppressed the rest of the week. The time spent with their spouses then became payback for the oppression – they would give birth to one child for each of the six days of oppression! Moses chose the Sabbath. When the Holy One gave Israel the Sabbath through Moses, Moses rejoiced that the portion that God chose for Israel was the same as the one he had chosen for them in Egypt. That is why the Israelites were oppressed and made to work only six days during the week when they were slaves….however it was for the six days of oppression that they gave birth to six infants in every brood.
For those who claimed that the Israelites gave birth to broods of twelve, it was because they were forced to work day and night during the six days, so their payment was double. They gave birth to twelve for the night and the day. It seems to me that the twelve included six boys and six girls because the day is associated with males and the night with females. The night is ruled over by the moon and the day by the sun. The moon, which is the weaker of the two heavenly bodies is associated with the female while the sun which is the more active is associated with male.
The basis of the opinion that sixty were born in each brood is the verse, “The more they oppressed them, the more they increased (yarbeh).” The verse should have stated “the more they oppressed them, the more they gave birth (yifrah).” Yarbeh implies multiples more than one. This means they gave birth to sixty and not just six since yarbeh would be ten times the original number…
The one who said that they gave birth like the reeds in the field implies that they gave birth without limits or boundaries like the reeds grow in a field. They gave birth at such a great rate because they received a blessing from above to such an extent that there were no limits to their rate of reproduction…
Perhaps you are bothered by the suggestion that a woman gave birth to sixty in one brood. Know that the fetus which goes forth in the form of a man is more or less the size of a single finger.*This idea of a woman conceiving a small human being in her womb was typical in the Middle Ages. It was called a homunculus. The Maharal suggests that the woman could potentially conceive ‘sixty’ small human beings but was limited by her ability to give birth to them all. Wikipedia: A homunculus is Latin for \"little man\" is a representation of a small human being. Popularized in 16th-century alchemy and 19th-century fiction, it has historically referred to the creation of a miniature, fully formed human. What this means is that a woman’s fecundity was so great that she had the potential to give birth to sixty, were it not for her limits in actually giving birth since they could not all grow to full size. The statement means she could carry sixty in her womb if she had had the power to deliver them." + ], + [ + "Israel’s Spiritual Development in Egypt
“And many: as it states, I let you grow like the plants of the field.” (Ezek. 16:6) *The two verses from Ezekiel quoted here are certainly among the strangest in the Haggadah. Israel’s development is compared here to a field of plants but also to a young woman who is just reaching her physical maturity. It is through the merit of the patriarchs that the nation develops in its maturity but it is through its own merit and the performance of good deeds that they reach physical and spiritual wholeness. Even, then, it takes God “dressing” them in good deeds and Torah so that they can enter the marriage canopy. This means that just as one plant does not give forth a different type of plant but gives forth its own blossoms, so too the Israelites gave birth as one… The Israel became an am gadol, great, atzum, mighty, and rav, many, were for the merit of the three patriarchs. Am gadol was for Abraham to whom it was said, “I will make you a great (gadol) nation.” Therefore they merited having “great” children. They merited being atzum, mighty, because of Isaac of whom it is stated: “Go away from us for you have become too mighty (atzamta) for us.” (Gen.26:16) And they merited becoming rav, many, because of Jacob who gave birth to twelve mighty tribes. Concerning him, scripture states, “The Almighty will bless you and cause you to be fertile and multiply.” The forefathers are the roots from which the branches go forth in these three areas. This is how the sages understood how these three attributes went forth from the forefathers to the people of Israel.", + "“You shall increase and become many and come to possess great ornaments.” This means that even though the Israelites of that generation were subjugated and spent their time making bricks, they were clean and pure of body. This is the meaning of b’adee adaiyim, “you have come to possess great ornaments.” Just ornaments are used to decorate the body, so the Israelites were clean and lovely in their bodies and very beautiful.", + "“Your hair sprouted.” The Israelites of that time were the first complete generation. For when they reached six hundred thousand, they were considered a whole nation. “Your breasts were firm and your hair sprouted,” means that they had developed beyond their childhood to be a whole nation. Because they reached their wholeness they were fit to enter beneath the wings of the Divine Presence.", + "“But you were naked and bare.” Yet they still did not have mitzvot or Torah to adorn their souls, just as clothing adds dignity to the body. A bride is worthy to enter under the wedding canopy because she wears decorative clothing. So with the Holy One, because they were “naked and bare,” God gave them Torah and mitzvot and only then did the Divine presence join them, as we find, “make me a sanctuary that I may dwell with them.” (Ex. 25:8)", + "“I will pass before you and see you wallowing in blood.” This means that God gave Israel two commandments with which to engage themselves: the Pesach offering and circumcision. Israel would be worthy of redemption for fulfilling these two divine commandments, as it is stated, “because of the blood of your covenant I have sent forth your prisoners.” (Ezek. 9:11) This refers specifically to these two commandments. Circumcision involves removing the foreskin which represents the degradation and diminishment of the human being. The foreskin serves as a barrier between human beings and God. After he has removed this barrier which diminishes man, then he can certainly serve God through the blood of the Passover offering. For the Pesach offering is primarily the service of God and it made him worthy of being redeemed. That is why God gave Israel these two commandments. They are the beginning of all the other commandments and the basis of the statement to “remove evil and do good.” (Psalm 34:15)" + ], + [ + "Three Stages of Oppression
“Egyptians imputed evil.” The Haggadah explains vayarei’u, “they imputed evil” to mean that the Egyptians opposed the Israelites and thought that they would harm Egypt just as they would oppose anyone who they thought would harm them. “They oppressed them.” This means that the Egyptians imposed slavery on the Israelites, as the proof text states: “They placed taskmasters upon them in order to oppress them.” (Ex 1:11) “And they placed hard labor upon us.” This suggests that they didn’t just enslave the Israelites but did something more. They also increased the amount of imposed labor to more then was reasonable. The proof text for this is: “They ruthlessly imposed upon the Israelites the various labors…” (Ex.1:13-14) This refers to labor that is beyond the ability of a person.
These three stages in Israel’s oppression are related to the three characteristics of Israel (we saw earlier): gadol (great), atzum (mighty), and rav (many). In response the Egyptians said, “Let us deal wisely with them…” This opposition was meant to decrease the number of the Israelites, thereby addressing their population. In response to the fact that they were a great nation (am gadol), they decided to oppress them. Oppression is meant to cause the Israelites to be humiliated which is the opposite of “great.” In response to the fact that they were “mighty” (atzum), they placed hard labor upon them in order to break their strength and their spirit. *The three characteristics of the Israelites were a product of their ancestors: great, mighty and many. The Maharal now suggests that there were a three stage process of breaking down the Israelites. Destroy their greatness by imputing evil to them, demean their might by enslaving them, and ultimately destroying them by oppressing them." + ], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [ + "Israel’s Oppressing in Egypt
“We cried out to Adonai.”*An interesting psychological insight. We only complain when we think that there is a possibility of change. The people stopped complaining under the old king since there was no hope of change. But once he died they began to complain once again because they were afraid that the new king would be just as bad – the moaning might have been because of some possibility of change for the better… The Haggadah brings the verse, “And it happened when a long time had passed that the king of Egypt died,” (Ex 2:23) to teach us that the great cry came at the time of the King’s death. The Israelites were afraid that the next king would act in the same fashion as the first king and therefore they began to cry out. When the first king was alive, they had despaired of any hope so they didn’t moan. People stop moaning when there is no hope at all.
The sages offer a different interpretation: “The king died” does not mean that he literally died but rather than he was stricken with leprosy. We find the expression “dead” is used in connection with leprosy, as in the verse, “Let Miriam not be as one who is dead,” (Nu. 12:12) and similarly, “In the year the King Uzziyahu died…” (Is. 6:6) Because Pharaoh was stricken with leprosy, the magicians of Egypt told Pharaoh that the only cure was for him to slaughter 150 children every morning and 150 children every night and to then bathe in their blood twice a day. When the Israelites heard about this decree, they began to groan.
Why did the magicians instruct Pharaoh to slaughter the Israelite children and to bathe in their blood? They advised him thus in order to increase their cruelty toward the Israelites as much as possible. Even though they had already begun throwing their young in the Nile, Pharaoh didn’t have any direct dealings with this. But by bathing in the blood of the Israelite children, he was directly involved in the cruelty – and there was no greater cruelty than this. The magicians gave Pharaoh this advice with evil intent. Bathing was even worse than drinking the blood; when one drinks the blood, he only sees the blood once but when he bathes in it, he watches it. They told him that when he did this he would be cured of the leprosy – that is why they gave him this advice to slaughter three hundred children and bath in their blood. When this happened, the Israelites began moaning and crying out and their cry reached up to God. For nothing could be worse than this. “The Israelites groaned from bondage and cried out.” (Ex 2:23)
The word vayizaaku, they cried out, is the language of a lament,*The word lament is associated with the book of Lamentations. It is a specific genre of literature which mourns the misfortunes affecting the individual or the nation. The language of lament in Ezekiel and here in Exodus both use the verb za’ak to cry out. as in the verse, “Cry and howl, son of man.” (Ezek. 21:17) “Their plea from bondage went up to God. God heard their cry.”
(Ex 2:23-24) As it states in Scripture, “The souls of the dead (halalim) cry out.”*The word naaka, based on the verse from Job implies not just crying out because of the hard labor but also in grief for the death of their children. It was the “straw that broke the camel’s back” and moved God to respond to the suffering. Hard labor alone was not enough reason for God to enter history. (Job 24:12) The cry for the murdered children rose up to God and as a result of that God also heard their cry for the oppressive labor. God answered them for two reasons: grief over the death of the children and the moaning for the hard labor. For these reasons “God remembered the covenant God made with them.” If it hadn’t been for the grief over the death of the infants, the cry for the harsh labor might not have come before God.
Three things*The three things that are necessary for prayers to be received are reflected in Exodus 2:23-24. These are not the primary text but the proof texts that the Haggadah includes here.
1. The Israelites groaned…and cried out
a. Groaning for death of children and crying for the hard labor
b. They prayed to God with their whole heart
2. Their cry for help rose up to God
a. The death of the children moved God to act.
b. Nothing stood in way of their prayers.
3. God heard their moaning
a. It was the moaning and not just crying that convinced God.
b. It was a fitting time for God to receive their prayers.
There are a lot of things that we might challenge about these two interpretations of prayer. What is a
fitting time for prayer? Why was God only ready to receive their prayers when they involved in the death of the Israelite children? These are questions that are deserving of more discussion. are needed for one’s prayer to be answered. First, a person must direct his heart to God. Second, if there are heavenly opponents opposing their prayers, the prayers will not be accepted. And third, it must also be a proper time for the prayer to be accepted. So the verse says, “They cried out,” meaning they cried out to God with their whole heart. “Their prayer rose up to God from the hard work” means there were no accusers blocking their prayers. “God heard their cry,” means that it was a fitting time for their prayer to be accepted. It was for these three reasons that God now accepted their prayers." + ], + [ + "“God heard our voice.” It was necessary for the Haggadah to quote this verse, “God heard their moaning,” (Ex. 2:24) because God listened to the cry of the Israelites came a result of the merit of their forefathers, as the verse goes on to state, “God (Elohim) remembered His covenant with Abraham Isaac, and Jacob.” God heard their cry because of forefathers and not because their ancestors in Egypt were worthy.
In Deuteronomy, “God (Adonai) heard our voice,” the unique name*The expression Hashem Hamiyuchad, the unique name of God, is a reference to the tetragrammaton, the four letter name of God. The connection between this name and kol, voice, is not completely clear. When Jacob comes to his father to receive a blessing through deceit, Scripture states, \"The voice is the voice of Jacob.\" The Talmud states: “So long as the voice of Jacob is heard in prayer and study, the hand of Esau is powerless against Jacob.” The voice, then, is associated with invoking God’s name. In Kabbalah, kol is an attribute of God. of God appears in this verse, while in Exodus we read, “God (Elohim) heard their moaning,” using the name Elohim. The unique name of God is associated with the use of the word kol, voice, since the God of Jacob is also connected to the verse, “The voice is the voice of Jacob.” (Gen. 27:22) Understand this well! In the second verse, the name Elohim is used in connection with the word naakatam, their moaning, because Elohim is associated with the attribute of justice.
One should note the order of this verse: “Elohim heard their moaning, Elohim remembered his covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Elohim saw the Israelites, and Elohim knew.” Elohim is mentioned separately four times instead of combining them together. (Elohim heard, remembered, saw, and knew…) This is a mighty matter. It teaches us that Israel was watched over by a higher power after they were abandoned and that God then brought them close and cleaved to them on four different stages. *This is the process by which God cleaves to Israel and brings them close to Him. By the same token it is also the process by which we bring God close to us as well. The Maharal writes: “According to the Ramban, this is a great mystery.” The Ramban uses this expression whenever he makes reference to Kabbalistic matters in his Torah commentary.
1. Shemiyah, hearing is the first stage. In this stage, the wall that separates Israel from the divine is removed so that God can ‘hear’ their cry.
2. Zechirah, recalling, is the second level. God recalls but this is not a complete state of cleaving. It is simply a matter of remembering but it is still not completely known.
3. Ri’iah, seeing, is the third stage. This is a greater state of cleaving, but it is still only partial since one only cleaves to that which is outward.
4. Yediah, knowing, is the final and deepest stage. This is the stage of intellectual attainment through which outer and inner essence becomes known." + ], + [ + "“He saw our affliction: This refers to the disruption in family life.”*Affliction is defined as depriving a couple of marital intimacy. Sex is seen as not only natural but also a good: not just a means of giving birth to offspring but also a means of improving the quality of life and relationships. The sages interpret this verse, “He saw our affliction, our toil, and our oppression…” as referring to: disrupting family life, the killing of the Israelite boys and the oppression of the nation.
Anyeinu, our affliction, refers to one who is deprived of good. Had the verse said anotainu then we could have understood it as referring to hard labor as in the expression, anoto b’sivolotam. (Ex. 1:11) The word anyeinu comes from the same root as oni, poverty or deprivation of good. Anyeinu, then, does not refer to slavery since one is not afflicted by slavery but one suffers from slavery. Oni refers to that which deprives the individual of good; that is, the Egyptians made the men work in the fields in order to separate the men from their wives. This is the implication of “deprived of good.” The Egyptians separated the men from the women so that they would not continue to have children.
Amaleinu, our toil, should not be interpreted as referring to hard work. Rather, it refers to something that is troubling and gives one no rest. When the Egyptians tossed the Israelite babies into the Nile River, this was troubling in their eyes. It is amal because it is something that the person cannot tolerate.
Lachazeinu, our oppression, is understood according to its plain sense meaning.
We see three things here anyeinu, amaleinu and lachazeinu. The first involved deprivation, the second was something even worse than deprivation, and the third term involved the worst suffering. When they experienced oppression, the Israelites didn’t even want to live any longer." + ], + [], + [], + [], + [ + "Angels, Seraphs, and Messengers
“And God took us out of Egypt with a mighty hand, and outstretched arm, with great terror and with signs and wonders.” I have already discussed why the Exodus could only take place through an act of God.*See the opening chapters of Gevurot Hashem which have been included at the end of Divrei Negidim. I will add another reason why the Exodus had to be so special. God wanted Israel to be His nation and wanted to take them out from the authority of Egypt so that they would be God's servants. That which is special to God, God alone and not through another. Furthermore, how was it possible for an angel to be the means of redemption? Since Israel was completely under the power of Egypt, another angel had no right to interfere in the authority of the Egyptian patron angel. Certainly only God had the right to remove them from the authority of Egypt since Egypt also had its own authoritative angel. One angel could not interfere in the realm of another angel. Only God had the power to do this.
We must explain this statement: why do we say “I and not an angel,” “I and not a seraph,” and so on? From where do we derive this interpretation? It would seem that Scripture could have stated: “I will pass through to strike Egypt and bring judgement,” instead of saying “I will pass through the land of Egypt on this night and I will smite every first born in the land of Egypt from man and beast, and against all the Gods of Egypt I will exact judgement.” (Ex. 12:12) In this verse each matter is addressed separately. *The idea that each nation has an angelic patron is found both in the bible and in Midrashic and rabbinic literature. See Deuteronomy 32:8 and Daniel 10:13.Also see Numbers Rabbah 2:10. Wasn’t the purpose of passing through the land to smite the Egyptians and exact judgement upon them? Similarly, later the Torah states, “For the Lord will pass through to strike the Egyptians…” (Ex. 12:23) instead of saying (as this verse does) “God will pass through and strike the Egyptians,” (since the only purpose of passing through the land was to strike down the Egyptians.)
That is why the sages interpreted the verbs in Exodus 12:12 as each adding something new to our understanding of the verse: “I will pass through;” I and not an angel; “I will strike;” “I and not a seraph;” “I will exact retribution:” “I and not a messenger.” Each phrase introduces an exclusion by saying, “I and not X.”
This can be explained as follows. Acts that take place in this world happen in two different ways: some take place through natural laws and others through miraculous acts. Miraculous actions can also be divided into two categories: Those that happen though supernatural occurrences such as manna in the wilderness or the miraculous well that followed the Israelites through the wilderness. And there are those miraculous acts when providence withdraws allowing for disaster such as when God withdrew from the Assyrian camp, allowing for a plague to strike the Assyrians. When the Assyrians were struck down by a plague the people of Israel were saved. (see II King 19:35)
One might argue that the plagues were not carried out by the Holy One but came about in these three ways: (1) Israel was redeemed by an angel who brought them out though a “mighty hand,” which caused a supernatural act of redemption; (2) God withdrew from the world allowing a destructive act of a seraph to destroy Egypt and allow for about Israel’s redemption; (3) the redemption came about through an act of nature which occurred through heavenly forces. *The verse in Exodus repeats Egypt with each verse as if each aspect of the judgement was separate from the others. In Exodus 12:23, the verbs are combined rather than writing them separately as they are in Exodus 12:12.
Malakh – angels can carry out supernatural events in the world. It was not God but an angel who created the manna for God. The angel of course was carrying out God’s will.
Seraph – A fiery angel is the power of destruction. When God withdraws it allows the forces of destruction to occur in the world.
Shaliach – a messenger. understands nature as God’s messenger in the world.
Each of these forces are understood as intermediaries acting for God and not God’s immediate act. The Haggadah says of each of them, “I and not an angel, a fiery being, a messenger. God does God’s own dirty work, so to speak. He doesn’t leave it for His cabinet to do the work of redemption in Egypt.
In response to the first types of occurrence, we say, “Not by an angel who performs supernatural acts in the world.” To the second type we say, “Not by a seraph which allowed for the destruction of Egypt.” And to the third type, we say, “Not by a messenger which is a reference to the forces of nature which sometime rise up against a nation.” Nature is the messenger of God which acts in the world on God’s behalf.
Furthermore, there is another deep and amazing matter related to this passage. The angel that the text refers to is Mikhael. This name is spelled with the same letters as the word malakhi, my angel, “For my angel (malakhi) shall go before you…” (Ex. 23:23) Saraf is a reference to the angel, Gavriel. Mikhael is the angel of water and Gavriel is the angel of fire (that is why he is called a saraf). The statement, “The One who makes peace in the heavens…”*When you combine the Hebrew words for eish (fire) and mayim (water) you get shamayim, heaven. Only God can create heaven out of fire and water. is a reference to the two of them, since one is made of water and the other of fire and yet they do not harm one another. Water and fire are opposites in their action. There are some actions in the world that are drawn from water and others that are draw from fire and no one can combine the two of them together except the Holy Blessed One. Each of the angels is appointed over a different aspect of creation but God encompasses all of them.
The third type of angel is not limited to one particular area but its general power is more limited. It is called shaliach, a messenger. Since a messenger is considered like oneself, it includes all of the powers, but since it is only a messenger its powers are of a lesser category.*This is a classic principle of Jewish law. We might identify it with power of attorney. The person who is appointed to represent someone is considered to be like the person him- or her- self. Shaliach, then, is considered to be a smaller representation of God in carrying out the divine will. The greater sends the lesser. Among the sages this messenger is known as Metatron; its gematriah is the same as the divine name Shaddai. Concerning Metatron Scripture states, “Behold I have sent an angel before you…for my name is in him.” (Ex. 23:20-21) The sages called this messenger a small Shaddai…*Metatron and Shaddai both have the numerical value of 314. Metatron, then, is considered like a miniature essence of God.
Therefore, Scripture states, “I will pass through the land of Egypt – I and not an angel.” This means that the Exodus did not come from the attribute of water. “I and not by a saraf.” This means that neither was the Exodus from the attribute of fire. “Nor was it through a messenger.” The redemption did not happen through a messenger of God who had the same but more limited powers than God. It was brought about through the Holy One Himself who includes all of the powers of the universe….", + "“I am Adonai – I am the one and not another.” This is a mystery to the one who truly understands it for it hints at the matter of Elohim acheirim.*Elohim acheirim literally means “other gods.” I believe that he understands it here as a reference to the demonic realm. The goat that is sent to Azzazel is some-times understood in Kabbalah as an offering that is sent to the demonic realm to protect the community. I am Adonai uses the unique name of God and it is a reference to the goat that is sacrificed in the temple on Yom Kippur as part of the atonement offering. “And not another” is a reference to the second goat that is chosen by a lottery and is then sent off to Azzazel. It is called “Elohim acheirim.” God created this “other” as a way of removing the power of judgment and strangeness from the people. They are not part of the natural world; they include demons and destructive powers…" + ], + [], + [ + "The Types of Plagues
“With a mighty hand – this is a reference to pestilence. / With an outstretched arm – this refers to the sword. / With great terror - this refers to the revelation of the divine presence. / With sign – a reference to the staff. / And wonders – this refers to the blood.” (Deut. 26:8) There are many questions regarding this passage. How does the Haggadah connect all these things together: pestilence, sword, revelation of the divine presence, the staff and the plague of blood? Why does it single out pestilence and blood from the plagues? What is the connection between an outstretched arm and the sword? To which sword is the Haggadah referring? If “sword” is a reference to the death of the first born, why does it appear after the reference to pestilence and before blood? *The plagues should have appeared in their proper order: first blood, then pestilence and finally the death of first born (the sword). Even if the staff was used to perform the other plagues, why single it out with the plagues? There is great wisdom to be derived from this passage as we shall see!
The verse, “God took us out of Egypt with a mighty hand, an outstretched arm, with great terror, with signs and wonders,” suggests that there were five types of plagues which were brought upon Egypt.
Some plagues take place because of God’s absence. All of creation is ordered through God’s protective presence so that when God’s presence is hidden, creation become susceptible to chaos. The plague of pestilence took because the authored of creation was removed. This aspect of God is referred to as, “A strong hand.” The world is maintained through God’s providential presence, called the power of “God’s strong hand.” It is like a mighty person who supports a building and keeps it from falling. As soon as he removes himself for even a second the entire structure collapses.
There are some plagues that are only take place through God's active intervention against the recipient. This is reference to as “the outstretched arm.” For these plague to take place God must act, just as someone must take hold of the sword and strike with it.
\"The revelation of the divine presence\" is in between these two types of plagues; it is not carried out by God directly, like the death of the firstborn, nor is it completely out of God's control, like pestilence. The Divine Presence which is referred to as mora gadol, great terror,*How do we get from mora gadol (great terror) to the appearance of the Divine Presence? The word mareh means appearance and the word Mora (or yirah) means terror or fear. In true Midrashic fashion, the Haggadah plays on the similarity of these two words in Hebrew. Terror and awe result from the revelation of God through the plagues. does not come about because of an act performed against people. Rather the Divine Presence only causes terror to the extent that it inspires fear in the one who witnesses it. Still, one could say that without the Divine Presence there would not be yira’ah, fear of God, either. That is why it is in between the sword and pestilence. It can be compared to a king who visits a certain place and the people come to show reverence to the ruler. It is not the king himself who causes people to express reverence; it is the people's response to His presence. Yet it if king’s presence was not there they would not feel reverence for him, so, in a sense, he is responsible for it. It only occurs when the king appears in the place.
• A strong hand refers to pestilence and all those plagues that happen when God’s presence is removed.
• An outstretched arm refers to the sword and the plagues when God strikes the other party.
•And with great terribleness refers to the appearance of the Divine Presence and all the plagues like it. *Three types of plagues occur:
1. Some plagues result from God’s withdrawal from the land.
2. Some result from God’s active intervention in Egypt.
3. Some result from the sense of the immediacy of God’s presence.
The Maharal doesn’t tell us which plagues fall into each of these three categories. How would you categorize the plagues?
All the plagues that occurred in Egypt fell into these three categories: either they occurred when God removed the divine presence from them or God acted against the Egyptians with great might, or in some fashion acted in a way between these two.*We see, then, that there are five categories of plagues. If signs refers to naturally occurring plagues and wonders to supernaturally occurring plagues then we have the following
1. Natural - strong hand
2. Supernatural -strong hand
3. Appearance of divine presence
4. Natural “outstretched arm”
5. Supernatural “outstretched arm”
The Maharal does not appear to designate the various plagues into these categories – I leave to the reader to figure out how the plague would be divided up!
Another way of thinking about the plagues is as signs and wonders. Some plagues happened through purely natural occurrences and not through a supernatural divine act. Pestilence, the sword and the appearance of the Divine Presence did not occur through natural phenomena.
Generally, in the Midrash, sign (ot) is associated with the heavens while wonders (moftim) are associated with the earth. Thus, we read, “Behold I will put a fleece of wool on the threshing floor; if the dew is on the fleece only and it is dry on all the ground elsewhere then shall I know that you will save Israel by my hand as you have said.” (Jud. 6:37) Yet in the Haggadah the staff is associated with “signs” and these signs are not in heaven! *The wet fleece appears to be a sign from God – since it occurs from the dew, it is taken as a sign from the heavens. But the Maharal now wonders if “signs” are heavenly, what is the connection to the plagues and the staff?
Rather otot, signs, refers to natural occurrences which are apparent in the world while moftim, wonders, refers to occurrences are not natural. Thus, with the heavens we see the occurrence but not necessarily see the outcome while with the earth we see the outcome but we don’t necessarily see the events that led to the occurrence.*The expression here is signs poalim v’ein mitpa’alim vs. wonders, Mitpaalim v’ein poalim. Think of it this way: no one sees the flower blossom – one day it is there and the next it is a beautiful flower. That is a wonder. On the other hand, we can actually watch the occurrence an eclipse in the sky even though the outcome does not affect us directly. When something occurs in the heavens telling us that such and such will occur, it is considered a “sign.” Similarly, the staff was a sign that the plagues would occur (and not the agent of the plagues). But when the event actually occurs and it is something completely new, outside the norms of nature, then it becomes a wonder.
There was no wonder like the plague of blood; it was completely outside of nature. The rest of the plagues could be explained as natural occurrences. It is natural for frogs to come out of the river or lice to rise up from the land. Wild animals are found in the land – it was just a matter of them finding their way to Egypt. The same can be said of pestilence, boils, hail and locusts. Even darkness was not unnatural, it was an absence of light. So there was nothing unnatural about these plagues. Similarly, the death of the first born was not outside of nature – something had to cause the natural death of the firstborn.
These were the two means of causing the plagues: natural and supernatural. Only the first plague was supernatural and outside nature. It would not have been fitting for the staff to be the cause of the plagues. The staff was simply a sign of the plagues. The staff was a sign of natural events. We see, then, that the Haggadah tells us that the plagues occurred in three different manners and that each category of plagues can be divided into two categories: signs and wonder." + ] + ], + "The Ten Plagues": [ + [], + [], + [], + [ + "“Another interpretation: With a strong hand, two plagues… etc.” When we look more carefully at the plagues, we see that in the first five plagues, we see that Pharaoh hardened his own heart and in the second series of five plagues God caused Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened. From this we may conclude that the second five plagues are parallel to the first five plagues. When the second series of plagues occurred Egypt would not have been able to resist sending Israel forth. That is why, when it came time for the second series of five plagues, God found it necessary to make Pharaoh more obstinate.
When we look carefully at the two sets of plagues we can see that they are completely parallel to one another.
1. The first plague was blood; the sixth plague was boils. Boils are caused by an excess of blood. The only difference between these plagues is that the first plague struck effects the lower world while the sixth plague effects human beings who represent the upper world.*The water is the “lower” world while human beings are created with a divine soul so they represent the upper world. As he understands these two plagues, both of them have to do with an abundance of blood – the first in the river, and the sixth in the human body.
2. The second plague was frogs (which comes from the lower crawling creatures) and the seventh plague was hail (which comes from the upper world). We learn in the Talmud and Midrash that hail is merely frozen dew which comes from the upper waters.
3. The third plague was lice, from the lower world, and the eighth plague was locust, from the upper world. Locust are swarming insects which are like the “birds” of the heavens.
4. The fourth plague was wild earthly animals and the ninth plague was darkness that occurred by the absence of the heavenly planets.
5. The fifth plague was pestilence (the lower earthly animals), resulting in the death of the animals and the tenth plague was the death of the first born (human beings who are created from the upper worlds).
You see that there are five plagues for the lower creation and five plagues for the upper creation. The two sets of five are connected. That is why the Haggadah states two plagues (one above and one below) for each of these expressions in this verse: “a strong hand,” “an outstretched arm” and so on.
You can now understand why in the first set of plagues Pharaoh hardened his own heart while in the second set, God caused Pharaoh’s heart to be hardened. As long as the plagues weren’t against human beings directly, Pharaoh hardened his own heart. But by the second set of plagues (which were a direct attack on human beings,) Pharaoh could not have resisted freeing the Israelites.
Even though lice did affect the bodies of human beings they were an external nuisance, unlike the boils and the other plagues that came from within the body.
It was necessary for Pharaoh to experience the full round of ten plagues before Israel was freed, so it was necessary for God to harden Pharaoh’s heart so that he would not give in until he experienced the second set of five plagues." + ], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [], + [ + "The Order of the Plague
“Rabbi Judah gave the following mnemonic for the plagues: Datzakh Adash Ba’achav.” What insight did Rabbi Judah add to understanding the plagues by giving them a mnemonic? Certainly he had some insight in mind by abbreviating them in this way. He saw that the first two plagues of each grouping contained a warning while the third plague did not. The same pattern can be found with the second grouping of three plagues and the third grouping of three plagues. The tenth plague was also proceeded by a warning. But we must still explain why the plagues were ordered two with a warning and one without a warning.
When God wished to bring the plagues on Egypt, God began smaller plagues and ended with more severe plagues. I have already shown that the first plagues began with lower creations because if God had begun with the higher level of creation, Pharaoh would have freed them immediately. The existence of the earth is the lower realm of creation. Then comes those creatures which exist on the earth. They mediate between the lower and the higher creations, between heaven and earth. Finally come the highest real of creation which derives from the heavens. Human beings and animals dwell in the intermediate realm of between earth and heaven.
• The first three plagues, blood, frogs and lice, represent the lower realm of creation since they are derived from the earth and the water.
• The second set of three plagues were wild animals, pestilence and boils. They took place between the lower realm of earth and the upper realm of heaven. Arov, wild animals, took place through the animals that dwell on the earth; dever pestilence, affected the animals and shechin, boils, affected human beings and animals that dwell on the earth.
• The final three plagues derive from the higher realm, the heavens: barad, hail, comes from the heavens, arbeh, locust, fly in the heavens, and choshekh, darkness, comes from blocking out the heavenly bodies.
• Afterwards comes the final plague which derives from the highest realm of all since it affects the human soul which is even higher than the heavens.
There is also a special order to each grouping of plagues. The first plague begins, “Go to Pharaoh in the morning…” From this, we learn that Moses did not have permission to enter the palace to warn him so he had to do so wherever he could meet him. By the second plague Moses had more control over Pharaoh so he came to the palace to warn the King of Egypt. When he warned Pharaoh, the king responded, “I don’t need your warning regarding your plagues – they are only to humble me.” For the third plague, then, Moses caused the plague without warning to show that he had complete power over Pharaoh. And so they began again with the second and third set of plagues, as if Moses was starting over again. It was for this reason that Rabbi Judah grouped the plagues in this fashion." + ], + [], + [ + "Rabbi Eliezer said: The matter of the multiplication of the plagues can be explained naturally. If one strikes a person with a cane, there is only one strike but there are many aspects of the injury: broken bones, suffering, heat, abscess, and even boils. The same can be said regarding the plagues in Egypt and by the sea. Each one has four or five aspects to the injury caused." + ] + ], + "Dayenu": [ + [ + "The Steps to Divinity
“How many good steps has God bestowed upon us!” They are referred to as ma’alot tovot, good steps. Each one represents an additional step, like stairs, one of which is higher than the previous one, until one reaches the final and highest level, which “God built for us the Holy Temple to atone for our sins.” (dayyenu) Together they add up to fifteen steps. This number is not a coincidence. This is the number of steps from the Ezrat Nashim (the women’s courtyard) in the Temple to the Ezrat Yisrael (the Israelite courtyard). There are also fifteen psalms in the Book of Psalms which begin with the words, Shir HaMa’alot, the Song of Steps. It takes fifteen days for the moon to go from the new moon to the full moon. All of this proves that there is an ascent of fifteen and no more.
It is a reference to the name of God, Yud Hay which has a numerical value of fifteen. With this name God created two worlds: this world and the world that is coming, as it Scripture states, “For the Lord (Yah) God, is the rock of worlds.” *Tzur olamim, is literally the Rock of. It is usually translated the Eternal Rock. The word olamim is plural, referring to the two worlds which God creates, according to the Maharal: the upper world and the lower world. (Isa. 26:4) Since with this holy name (Yah), God created two worlds, we can conclude that the levels of creation reach to fifteen and no more….every ascent only reaches to fifteen.
So too, in this song, are there fifteen verses just as there are fifteen steps of ascent to the upper world. The highest step is the building of the Holy Temple since it is the through the Temple that we begin the journey toward the heaven.
The women’s courtyard represents the lowliest level since women are most connected to the material aspect of life. The ascent from the material to the spiritual is fifteen steps. *The attitude of the Maharal regarding women is misogynistic and fairly typical of his generation. I am translating it here fully aware of how unacceptable it is for us today.
Thus, when priests descended the steps to the women’s courtyard during the Simchat Beit Shoevah, *See Sukkot, 51b, Simchat Beit Shoeva was a special ceremony held on the intermediate days of Sukkot. It was considered to be the most joyous day of the year. they would go down the steps, turn to the west and proclaim, “Our fathers who were in this place stood with their backs toward the Temple of the lord and their face toward the east, and they worshipped the sun East; but as for us, our eyes are turned to the Lord (Yah).” In other words, they would say that their ancestors followed lowly things and bowed down to the sun and other material objects but our eyes are turned to Yah, the Holy One, the highest of all the spiritual levels.
These fifteen steps can be divided into three groups.*The Maharal divides the acts of God in Dayyenu into the following groupings
Escaping slavery:
1. He took us out of Egypt.
2. God meted out judgment.
3. Passed judgment on their gods.
4. God killed their firstborn.
5. God gave them great wealth.
Redemption from Egypt
1. Split the sea.
2. Led them through on dry land.
3. Drown the Egyptians.
4. Provided in the wilderness.
5. Fed them manna.
Maharal does not mention all five in this last grouping:
1. Commanding the Sabbath
2. Standing at Mount Sinai
3. Giving them the Torah
4. Entering the land of Israel
5. Building a temple.
The first group deals with the actual Exodus from the lowliness of slavery in Egypt. There was no ascent here - only the going out of Egypt so that they were no longer slaves. In the first grouping, God took them out, meted judgment out to the Egyptians and to their gods, killed the first born, and gave the Israelites great wealth. This was all part of the actual Exodus.
The middle group of five steps deals with an ascent through the miracles that took place during the Exodus. This grouping deals with the things that happened after they left Egypt: the splitting of the sea and allowing them to pass through on dry land, drowning of their enemies, providing them with food and giving them manna.
The final group of five levels is the completion of their unification and Israel’s cleaving to God. The final grouping deals with divine commandments which allowed Israel to cleave to God: God gave them the Sabbath (there can be little doubt that the Sabbath is a sign of Israel’s covenant and the beginning of their connection to God); The building of the Temple which represented God’s dwelling among them so that there was an absolute connection between God and Israel." + ] + ], + "Rabban Gamliel's Three Things": [ + [], + [ + "The Pesach Offering: A Symbol of Unity
“The Pesach offering which our ancestors ate… because God passed over.” God gave them the commandment of the Passover offering because Israel could not be saved from the plague of the first born if they were not considered to be the portion and the of the Holy One. That is why God commanded them to make an offering. The only reason that they were God’s people was for the purpose of serving God. It was through this service that they became God’s people. That is why the plague of the first born did not affect the Israelites.
It is for this reason that the offering that they brought was called Pesach. In Aramaic, Pesach is translated chayes, compassion. Because Israel was the Holy One’s portion, God took compassion upon them and made sure they weren’t destroyed. God choose Israel from all the other nations to be God’s own; just as God is singular, so God chose a singular nation. That is why everything associated with this divine service is associated with one.
• It is a commandment to make a whole offering with its limbs and innards and not to divide up the offering. Something divided up is no longer one.
• It must be eaten by one household.
• It is prohibited for the offering to be shared by two groupings of people or to eat it two places. In this way it must be eaten in a state of unity and wholeness.
• The lamb must be eaten when it is one year old. If it is two years old, it is no longer in a state of oneness.
• It must be a sheep and not a calf because the sheep is considered a more refined animal. Commenting on the following verse, “Israel is a scattered sheep,” (Jer. 50:17) the sages state, “Why is Israel compared to sheep? If you strike one limb of the sheep, all of its limbs feel it, so too, if one member of Israel sins, all of Israel feels the consequences. Achan *See the story of Achan in the book of Judges, chapter 7. According to the narrative, Achan pillaged an ingot of gold, a quantity of silver, and a \"beautiful Babylonian garment\" from Jericho, in contravention of God's directive that \"all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the Lord: they shall come into the treasury of the Lord\" (Joshua 6:19) Although the account suggests that Achan personally was guilty of coveting and taking these spoils, the chapter opens with a statement that the whole community of \"the children of Israel had committed a trespass.”
(Wikipedia) was one person during the time of Joshua, all of Israel experienced the consequences.” This can be explained as follows: the sheep has a more refined nature unlike the calf which is more coarse and tough. Its nature is more spiritual. Therefore, when one is beaten all of them suffer.
• It must be masculine and not feminine. The masculine form is considered more unified than the female maternal nature. Therefore, the offering should be from the male animals and not the female.
• It must be roasted and cannot be cooked in water or other juices because cooking in fluids causes its parts to fall apart. Roasting, on the other hand, causes the meat to stay together with the gravy around it. It can only be eaten when it has been roasted.
• Do not break the bones; if one broke the bones it would divided into parts, which is not proper.
• One should eat the Passover offering with matzah and maror. *Could this be a denial of the demonic as a separate realm? God is one but from God comes all the complexity of the world including the things we think of as the opposite. The Passover offering represents redemption while the maror is slavery – yet we eat them together. This is to contradict the heretics who claim that many can go forth from the one. Only one thing can come forth from one. As a result, when they see the complexity in the world, they will see that the many must have gone forth from many. As a result of all these things that emphasize oneness, one can conclude: this offering is for the one God, and should be eaten with matzah and maror. From God goes forth both freedom and slavery, the wound and the cure. Because God is one, God is everything. There is nothing but God. From the One come opposites." + ], + [], + [ + "Matzah: Timeless Redemption
Why do we eat this unleavened bread? This can be explained similarly to what we have said above, regarding Ha Lachma Anya. Matzah is a symbol of redemption. Redemption, taking them out of Egypt, was accomplished with a “strong hand,” as is stated in many places regarding the Exodus from Egypt: “For with a strong hand (hozek yad) the Lord took us out of Egypt.” (Ex. 13:16) Any activity that is performed with “a strong hand” is performed quickly with a strength that is beyond time.*We think of matzah as symbolizing the haste with which the Israelites left Egypt. The Maharal offers a different interpretation. It symbolizes the haste with which God redeemed them from slavery – possibly because they needed to leave Egypt before they became subjugated forever. Because God’s time was condensed (he writes here that God’s time was non-time) there was no time for the people to allow the dough to rise. Matzah is understood here as being timeless bread and in that sense it becomes eternal.
It is also stated, “Remember this day that you came out of Egypt… for with a strong hand the Lord took you out from this place; therefore no leavened bread shall be eaten.”(Ex 12:3) This suggests that hametz results from procrastinating while redemption takes place without time since God redeemed them with a “strong hand.” Similarly, God commanded them to eat the Passover offering b’hipazon, ‘with haste.’ This was done so that they would cling to the virtue from which “a strong arm’ came, bringing them forth quickly with the same power which is above time. We can now understand the passages, “The matzah which we eat…because the dough did not have time to become leavened…” If our ancestors' dough did not have time to become leavened it is because God took us out “with a strong arm,” with haste, without time. Therefore, we must eat matzah which is made quickly as well. This explanation is very obvious!
According to all the commentaries, matzah is a symbol of freedom and maror is certainly a symbol of subjugation. This is another reason why we are supposed to eat the matzah and maror together with the Passover offering. The Passover offering is a symbol that we are one people who worship the one God above as we have previously seen. From God goes forth matzah and maror, slavery and freedom. That is why matzah and maror are required by the Torah along with the Pesach offering. When there isn’t a Pesach offering, then we are only required to have the matzah. At this time the maror is not required since it has no reality of its own; rather it is secondary to the Pesach offering." + ], + [], + [], + [ + "God Redeemed All of Us
“In every generation…” This means that each person should see himself as if he personally left Egypt. Therefore, the individual must praise and exalt the Holy One; that is why the passage ends, “Therefore it is our duty to give thanks, praise, pay tribute, etc…” (from the Haggadah) It is to illustrate this, the passage state, “You shall tell your child on that day, ‘It is because of this which God did for me…’” (Ex 13:8) instead of saying, “us;” this is a way of saying it is as if he went forth from Egypt. Afterwards this passage states, “Not us alone did God redeem.” This statement adds that God took out both the parents and the children. When God redeemed Israel from Egypt, God redeemed them in their entirety. It was for Klal Yisrael, for the entire people of Israel, so that none of the people would continue to live under the domination of Egypt. That is why the redemption was for the parents and the children. If God was only concerned with the people who were in Egypt, God would have only spoken about that generation. By saying “Us” it emphasizes that the Holy One wished to redeem the entire people of Israel present and future." + ] + ], + "First Half of Hallel": [ + [], + [ + "Words of Praise
“Therefore it is our duty to thank.” The versions of this text which I have found in Ashkenazic Seders and which I consider to be the correct one is, “Therefore it is our duty to thank, praise, pay tribute, glorify, exalt, honor, bless, extol and acclaim to the one who performed these miracles for our ancestors and for us.” There are nine expressions of praise. “Let us therefore, recite a new song before God, Halleluyah,” is the tenth expression of praise. It would appear that there are ten expressions of praise in the book of Psalms. In Talmud Pesahim, it states that there are ten types of songs in this book: nigun, nitzuach, mizmor, shir, hallel, tefillah, berachah, hodaah, ashrei, and halleluyah. The greatest of these terms is Halleluyah because it contains the name of God as well as an expression of praise. (Pesahim 117a) That is why there are nine terms of praise plus Halleluyah, which is the greatest of all the terms.
Our text of the Haggadah, we read, “God took us out from slavery to freedom, from grief to joy, from mourning to feast, from subjugation to redemption… Let us say before Him, Halleluyah!”*In our Haggadot the version is “God took us out from slavery to freedom, from grief to joy, from mourning to festivity, from darkness to great light, from subjugation to redemption. Let us recite a new song before God, Halleluyah! The Maharal comments on the different versions of this passage toward the end of the passage
“From slavery to freedom,” should be understood in the plainest sense: because the slavery was crushing, it destroyed their spirit. Regarding this we say “From grief to joy. When they were oppressed with hard labor, their spirits were broken so God came and transformed their grief into joy. “From mourning to feast” is stated to comment on the passage, “They embittered their lives;” bitterness is a type of mourning, as it says in scripture, “I will make it like time of mourning for an only son, and its end like a bitter day.” (Amos 8:10) God transformed this state of being into a feast which is the opposite of mourning. Life becomes bitter when a person’s life is not as it should be. Thus, Scripture state, “They embittered their lives.”
These three expressions are referenced in Scripture one after the other: “so they set task masters over them to oppress them with forced labor;” (Ex. 1:11) “the Egyptians ruthlessly imposed upon the Israelites;” (Ex 1:13) and “they embittered their lives with hard labor.” (Ex. 1:14) “From subjugation to redemption:” is the fourth statements here. They were like people who were enslaved by the king but were liberated by God. *The three verse reflect the three elements of transformation
Ex. 1:11 – from slavery to freedom
Ex. 1:13 – From grief to joy
Ex. 1:14 – From mourning to feast
In the tenth chapter of Pesahim in the Mishnah the version of the text is different. It states, “From darkness to light and from subjugation to redemption.” The Mishnah adds a fifth statement to these four. The sages meant to teach us that while the Israelites were under the authority of the Egyptians, they were like a person who was dwelling in darkness and for whom there was something blocking the sun. While they were in Egypt, it was as if they did not completely exist yet. This is what the sages meant when they said that Israelites in Egypt were like a fetus in its mother’s womb. Regarding this state of being, the Mishnah says, “From darkness to light.” Darkness is like not completely existing; only when they went forth from Egypt did they come to complete existence because they now became God’s people.
The version of this statement in the Haggadah has only four and not five expressions. Both are correct and there is no contradiction between them. *Though the Mishnah and the Haggadah have slightly different versions of the text, the Maharal follows the rabbinic tradition of validating both versions of the text. There were, of course other versions of the Haggadah text as well, with which the Maharal was no doubt familiar. It is interesting that he offers an explanation for the different versions but respects the difference at the same time. One might say that this is an expression of pluralism." + ] + ], + "Second Cup of Wine": [] + }, + "Rachtzah": [], + "Motzi Matzah": [], + "Maror": [], + "Korech": [], + "Shulchan Orech": [], + "Tzafun": [], + "Barech": { + "Birkat Hamazon": [], + "Third Cup of Wine": [], + "Pour Out Thy Wrath": [] + }, + "Hallel": { + "Second Half of Hallel": [], + "Songs of Praise and Thanks": [], + "Fourth Cup of Wine": [] + }, + "Nirtzah": { + "Chasal Siddur Pesach": [], + "L'Shana HaBaa": [], + "And It Happened at Midnight": [], + "Zevach Pesach": [], + "Ki Lo Na'e": [], + "Adir Hu": [], + "Sefirat HaOmer": [], + "Echad Mi Yodea": [], + "Chad Gadya": [] + } + }, + "versions": [ + [ + "Rabbi Mark Greenspan", + "http://www.oceansidejewishcenter.org/" + ] + ], + "heTitle": "דברי נגידים על הגדה של פסח", + "categories": [ + "Liturgy", + "Haggadah", + "Commentary" + ], + "schema": { + "heTitle": "דברי נגידים על הגדה של פסח", + "enTitle": "Divrei Negidim on Pesach Haggadah", + "key": "Divrei Negidim on Pesach Haggadah", + "nodes": [ + { + "heTitle": "קדש", + "enTitle": "Kadesh" + }, + { + "heTitle": "ורחץ", + "enTitle": "Urchatz" + }, + { + "heTitle": "כרפס", + "enTitle": "Karpas" + }, + { + "heTitle": "יחץ", + "enTitle": "Yachatz" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מגיד", + "enTitle": "Magid", + "nodes": [ + { + "heTitle": "הא לחמא עניא", + "enTitle": "Ha Lachma Anya" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מה נשתנה", + "enTitle": "Four Questions" + }, + { + "heTitle": "עבדים היינו", + "enTitle": "We Were Slaves in Egypt" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מעשה שהיה בבני ברק", + "enTitle": "Story of the Five Rabbis" + }, + { + "heTitle": "כנגד ארבעה בנים", + "enTitle": "The Four Sons" + }, + { + "heTitle": "יכול מראש חודש", + "enTitle": "Yechol Me'rosh Chodesh" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מתחילה עובדי עבודה זרה היו אבותינו", + "enTitle": "In the Beginning Our Fathers Were Idol Worshipers" + }, + { + "heTitle": "ארמי אבד אבי", + "enTitle": "First Fruits Declaration" + }, + { + "heTitle": "עשר המכות", + "enTitle": "The Ten Plagues" + }, + { + "heTitle": "דיינו", + "enTitle": "Dayenu" + }, + { + "heTitle": "פסח מצה ומרור", + "enTitle": "Rabban Gamliel's Three Things" + }, + { + "heTitle": "חצי הלל", + "enTitle": "First Half of Hallel" + }, + { + "heTitle": "כוס שניה", + "enTitle": "Second Cup of Wine" + } + ] + }, + { + "heTitle": "רחצה", + "enTitle": "Rachtzah" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מוציא מצה", + "enTitle": "Motzi Matzah" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מרור", + "enTitle": "Maror" + }, + { + "heTitle": "כורך", + "enTitle": "Korech" + }, + { + "heTitle": "שולחן עורך", + "enTitle": "Shulchan Orech" + }, + { + "heTitle": "צפון", + "enTitle": "Tzafun" + }, + { + "heTitle": "ברך", + "enTitle": "Barech", + "nodes": [ + { + "heTitle": "ברכת המזון", + "enTitle": "Birkat Hamazon" + }, + { + "heTitle": "כוס שלישית", + "enTitle": "Third Cup of Wine" + }, + { + "heTitle": "שפוך חמתך", + "enTitle": "Pour Out Thy Wrath" + } + ] + }, + { + "heTitle": "הלל", + "enTitle": "Hallel", + "nodes": [ + { + "heTitle": "מסיימים את ההלל", + "enTitle": "Second Half of Hallel" + }, + { + "heTitle": "מזמורי הודיה", + "enTitle": "Songs of Praise and Thanks" + }, + { + "heTitle": "כוס רביעית", + "enTitle": "Fourth Cup of Wine" + } + ] + }, + { + "heTitle": "נרצה", + "enTitle": "Nirtzah", + "nodes": [ + { + "heTitle": "חסל סידור פסח", + "enTitle": "Chasal Siddur Pesach" + }, + { + "heTitle": "לשנה הבאה", + "enTitle": "L'Shana HaBaa" + }, + { + "heTitle": "ויהי בחצי הלילה", + "enTitle": "And It Happened at Midnight" + }, + { + "heTitle": "זבח פסח", + "enTitle": "Zevach Pesach" + }, + { + "heTitle": "אדיר במלוכה", + "enTitle": "Ki Lo Na'e" + }, + { + "heTitle": "אדיר הוא", + "enTitle": "Adir Hu" + }, + { + "heTitle": "ספירת העומר", + "enTitle": "Sefirat HaOmer" + }, + { + "heTitle": "אחד מי יודע", + "enTitle": "Echad Mi Yodea" + }, + { + "heTitle": "חד גדיא", + "enTitle": "Chad Gadya" + } + ] + } + ] + } +} \ No newline at end of file