Vol 17.11 - Chag HaPesach 2 Spanish French Audio Video
Resolving the expressions (diyukim) and questions on many of the sections in the Hagadah of Pesach
(Hei lachma anya, Avadim Hayinu, Mitchila Ovdei avodah zara, v'hi sheomdu, Kama maalot tovot, u’bana lanu et Beis HaBechirah)
According to the main theme and general intention of the text (nussach) of the Hagadah
Not edited - incomplete
1. It is known that there are differences between the obligation and Mitzvah of remembering Yetzias Mitzrayim on the night of Pesach versus the obligation on all the other days of the year. One of the differences is that during the whole year, a general remembrance (זכירה בעלמא) is sufficient – as it states: “it is a Mitzvah to mention (להזכיר) Yetzias Mitzrayim”. Whereas on the night of Pesach the Mitzvah is – to recount (סיפור) Yetzias Mitzrayim. And in the words of Rambam: “it is a positive commandment of the Torah to relate the miracles and wonders wrought for our ancestors in Egypt etc.”
Since the story and remembrance of Yetzias Mitzrayim is a “great foundation and strong pillar in our Torah and belief” and “we have received many Mitzvot concerning this, both positive and negative Mitzvot etc. therefore we constantly recite in our blessings and prayers ‘ a remembrance of Yetzias Mitzrayim’” (זכר ליציאת מצרים).
It is understood that in the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim on the night of Pesach, the essence and the general topic of Yetzias Mitzrayim is brought out, the way it is a “great foundation and strong pillar in our Torah etc.”
The Mitzvah of story of Yetzias Mitzrayim on the night of Pesach is learned from the verse “and you shall tell your son” (וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֵאמֹר) which is the Mitzvah of saying the Haggadah.
Since subjects are stated visibly and with emphasis in the beginning and in the conclusion, it is understood that the essence of the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim which is in it, is emphasized that this is a general topic and subject, and this is primarily in the beginning and end of the “main nusach of the Haggadah that the sages enacted as an obligation on everyone” (as the Mishneh states: “we begin with shame and end with praise” (מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח) – “In the beginning we were slaves” and “In the beginning our fathers served idols” (מִתְּחִלָּה עוֹבְדֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הָיוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ) and afterward is the passage “this is what has stood by our fathers” (והיא שעמדה) - the end of the “aspect of Mitzrayim” (ענין מצרים) and the introduction (אריינפיר) to the main section of the “story of Lavan and Yaakov” ( the “homily (דורש) from) an “Aramean wished to destroy my father” (אֲרַמִּי אֹבֵד אָבִי)
Since according to the “nusach of the Haggadah” as the “custom of all Yisroel from the first generations” it starts from the passage “This is the bread of affliction” which is recited at the very beginning even before the Mah Nishtana, it is understood that even in this “beginning”, a general point is emphasized.
Similarly in the “conclusion” of the “miracles and wonders that G-d did for us in that time“– the completion of the passage of “How many levels of favors has the Omnipresent One bestowed upon us” (כַּמָה מַעֲלוֹת טוֹבוֹת לַמָּקוֹם עָלֵינוּ) – and “built for us the Beit HaBechirah to atone for all our sins”.
To understand the essential topic of the aspect of the Haggadah and story of Yetzias Mitzrayim, one must preface and explain certain precise aspects of the aforementioned passages:
This is the bread of affliction that our fathers ate in the land of Egypt:
הִא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא דִּי אֲכָלוּ אַבְהָתָנָא בְאַרְעָא דְמִצְרָיִם. כָּל דִכְפִין יֵיתֵי וְיֵיכֹל, כָּל דִצְרִיךְ יֵיתֵי וְיִפְסַח. הָשַּׁתָּא הָכָא, לְשָׁנָה הַבָּאָה בְּאַרְעָא דְיִשְׂרָאֵל. הָשַּׁתָּא עַבְדֵי, לְשָׁנָה הַבָּאָה בְּנֵי חוֹרִין.
The passage “This is the bread of affliction“ comes after the Siman of “Maggid” (מַגִּיד). From this it is understood that the reason that we recite this passage at the beginning of starting (אפריכטן) the Seder, in not (only) because its topic is to invite to the seder table, all those who do not have the needs for the meal and the Pesach – since at that time, one had to say, before the Seder began, while coming home from the synagogue (or even before this – while in the synagogue ) since “all who need” (כָּל דִצְרִיךְ) means even someone who must be provided with the four cups etc., beginning with the first cup for Kiddush - but (also and primarily) since this is the (preface and) beginning of the telling of Yetzias Mitzrayim, which is why it comes specifically (immediately) after the Siman of “Maggid”
It is not understood:
What is the connection of all these three things in the passage to the aspect of the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim?
On the contrary
1) The topic of the beginning of the passage “This is the bread of affliction” is not a story about the going out of Egypt, but the opposite – concerning the oppression in Egypt.
2) Even in the conclusion of the passage “This year (we are) here etc. This year (we are) slaves it emphasizes that which we are in a condition of Galut and servitude – the opposite (of the story) of Geulah.
Therefore what place does this passage have in the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim?
In the general order of the Mitzvot and the aspects on this night, now (השתא) and at the head, the reciting of the Haggadah regarding the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim, the aspect of “now” (השתא) – freedom - must be emphasized and recognizable. Therefore “one must do all the deeds of this night in a manner of freedom” – yet here it states and one speaks of “This year (we are) here .. This year (we are) slaves” – the opposite of freedom.
3. Seemingly one could say (albeit with difficulty) that with “This is the bread of affliction” one wishes to stress that the only “our fathers” (אבהתנא) were in the land of Mitzrayim, however, we are not in Mitzrayim. Similarly by the conclusion ““This year (we are) here; next year etc. “, the intent of this is similar to that which the Mishnah states that “we begin with shame (and end with praise)”.
In truth, however, one cannot say so, because:
1) According to this (the aspects of) the passage should have been said - not before the passage Mah Nishtana, but after it (as in the entire Haggadah), since the “it is a Mitzvah to say the Haggadah in a manner of answering the question that he is asked”.
2) The aspect of “begin with shame and end with praise” (in order that the “praise” is more recognizable and emphasized) only fits for something that was in the past, as the sages state regarding the reason that we beginning with “We were slaves” and “In the beginning our fathers served idols” (beginning with shame) and afterwards one continues (and “ends with praise”) concerning the present: “but now the Omnipresent One has brought us close to His service” since in this manner, the praise and thanks to G-d is more emphasized and felt with greater force. Therefore, this also awakens the feeling of freedom.
This however, does not fit, as is understood:
When one “begins with “shame”, in the present – “now we are here . . now we are slaves” , although one prays and trusts (comforts) that “next year we will be in the land of Israel and next year we will be free”, this however, is just a hope and feeling that is connected with (freedom in) the future, and not with a feeling of freedom, in the present, on this night.
Similarly one must understood, as aforementioned in the second section of the passage: “Whoever is hungry, let him come and eat; whoever is in need, let him come and conduct the Seder of Passover“:
What connection does this have with “Maggid”, to the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim?
According to all the aforementioned one must say that even though the passage of “This is the bread of affliction” is not a part of the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim itself (which comes mainly in the form of answering the questions Mah Nishtana etc., as aforementioned) – it is however related to the topic of “Maggid”, the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim. For this is a general preface, which gives one to understand and resolves a general question in the whole Seder of this night and in the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim – as will be explained.
4. It is also not understood why we say “This is the bread of affliction that our fathers ate in the land of Egypt” – as the commentators ask:
The matzah which we eat now is connected with the matzah that the Yidden ate when they were going out of Egypt and not with the Matzah which they ate in Egypt. And as it states later in the Haggadah: “This Matzah that we eat . . Because the dough of our fathers did not have time to become leavened as it states: "They baked Matzah-cakes from the dough that they had brought out of Egypt, because it was not leavened; for they had been driven out of Egypt”.
And the answer which is cited is that the Yidden in Egypt ate Matzah, because it was the manner (שטייגער) to feed the “captives” (שבויִם) matzah since “it is hard and does not digest quickly like Chometz” (or alternatively, as the Sforno states that) “the bread that they ate in oppression and they did not have time to allow the dough to rise until it became Chometz because of the taskmasters rushing them” (נוגשים אצים).
“These are things that contradict scripture and the truth since we do not find in either scripture or the Mishnah or Talmud that the Egyptians fed Yisroel Matzah”
And in addition to this:
If that were the intent, the Baal Haggadah should have cited a source (which is his manner in the entire Haggadah).
5. “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt, and the L-rd, our G‑d, took us out from there with a strong hand and with an outstretched arm. If the Holy One, blessed be He, had not taken our fathers out of Egypt, then we, our children and our children's children would have remained enslaved to Pharaoh in Egypt. Even if all of us were wise, all of us understanding, all of us knowing the Torah, we would still be obligated to discuss the exodus from Egypt; and everyone who discusses the exodus from Egypt at length is praiseworthy.” –
עֲבָדִים הָיִינוּ לְפַרְעֹה בְּמִצְרָיִם, וַיּוֹצִיאֵנוּ ה' אֱלֹהֵינוּ מִשָּׁם בְּיָד חֲזָקָה וּבִזְרֹעַ נְטוּיָה. וְאִלּוּ לֹא הוֹצִיא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶת אֲבוֹתֵינוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם, הֲרֵי אָנוּ וּבָנֵינוּ וּבְנֵי בָנֵינוּ מְשֻׁעְבָּדִים הָיִינוּ לְפַרְעֹה בְּמִצְרָיִם. וַאֲפִילוּ כֻּלָּנוּ חֲכָמִים כֻּלָּנוּ נְבוֹנִים כֻּלָּנוּ זְקֵנִים כֻּלָּנוּ יוֹדְעִים אֶת הַתּוֹרָה מִצְוָה עָלֵינוּ לְסַפֵּר בִּיצִיאַת מִצְרָיִם. וְכָל הַמַּרְבֶּה לְסַפֵּר בִּיצִיאַת מִצְרַיִם הֲרֵי זֶה מְשֻׁבָּח.
The question on this is known that the decree of the Mitzrayim was only (`they will enslave them and make them suffer,) for four hundred years.
Therefore what it meant by “If the Holy One, blessed be He, had not taken our fathers out of Egypt“?
The Galut could not have lasted more than four hundred years and immediately after that the Yidden would have gone out of servitude.
If the Yidden would have been enslaved because of their being and essence, one would have needed a separate innovation to draw them out from the condition of slavery. However since Yidden are inherently free - Bnei Chorin - and it is only because of the decree of the Covenant between the Parts ( ברית בין הבתרים) that they became slaves, therefore when the appointed time ended, the servitude would have immediately ended and they would revert to being free persons.
One cannot say that that they needed to rely on that which “G‑d, took us out from there” – because the exodus was not after the appointed four hundred years, but just two hundred and ten years - since
1. First off – this has nothing to do with the essential innovation of the exodus, but rather with the account of the four hundred years, that G-d did not count from the time of their descent to Mitzrayim, but from the birth of Yitzchak. However, this does not change the situation that after the set time, even according to the earlier accounting, the Yidden would have been free, automatically.
2. Secondly, we say “If the Holy One, blessed be He, had not taken our fathers out of Egypt, then we, our children and our children's children would have remained enslaved to Pharaoh in Egypt. This (namely, that even “we, our children and our children's children etc. would have remained in Egypt) is contrary to that which it states: “and the fourth generation will return here”. - Therefore how does it state that “If the Holy One, blessed be He, had not taken our fathers out of Egypt, then we, our children and our children's children would have remained enslaved to Pharaoh in Egypt”?
6. “In the beginning our fathers served idols but now the Omnipresent One has brought us close to His service” -מִתְּחִלָּה עוֹבְדֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הָיוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ, וְעַכְשָׁיו קֵרְבָנוּ הַמָּקוֹם לַעֲבדָתוֹ
One must understand:
1. “Has brought us close to His service“ means the generations starting from Avraham Avinu. (The first that was brought close to His service after “In the beginning our fathers served idols – referring to Terach”). Therefore why does it state “but now the Omnipresent One has brought us close to His service” and not “but afterwards the Omnipresent One has brought us close to His service”?
Even if one were to say that the word “now” means (not actually now - the time when the Haggadah is recited, but) at the time of Yetzias Mitzrayim – nevertheless the “brought close” started much earlier, before the Galut of Mitzrayim
And even before the covenant between the Parts, as the proof is immediately from the verse: "And I took your father Abraham from beyond the river, and I led him throughout the whole land of Canaan.”
2. The topic of the Haggadah is the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim “with miracles and wonders that were performed for us, and with our freedom”. However, the whole aspect, that “from the beginning” seemingly has no relation to the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim. It is only related in the aspect that we ““begins with shame and ends with praise” (“from the beginning” one must continue that afterwards one is brought close to His service so much so that it came to “and Jacob and his sons went down to Mitzrayim”
According to this, it is not straightforward:
Why does it matter to emphasize that G-d brought us close to His service? Seemingly, it should have said that “now (afterward)” we are (or explicitly: Avraham) became close and attached to G-d, and His service (or something similar)
From all the aforementioned, it is understood that for the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim (Maggid) the concern is that ““This year (we are) here; next year in the land of Israel. This year (we are) slaves; next year (we will be) free people.”
Not just “afterward” (in relation to Avraham) but also in relation to all the generations of Yidden which came after him, even until “now” literally, as will be explained
7. “This is what has stood by our fathers and us!” -וְהִיא שֶׁעָמְדָה לַאֲבוֹתֵינוּ וְלָנוּ. שֶׁלֹּא אֶחָד בִּלְבָד עָמַד עָלֵינוּ לְכַלּוֹתֵנוּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁבְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר עוֹמְדִים עָלֵינוּ לְכַלוֹתֵנוּ,וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַצִּילֵנוּ מִיָּדָם
One must understand:
1. if those that were “standing would have been greater in righteousness than the Yidden, the innovation would then be understood, that even though “ G-d saved us “, however, since they were evildoers and zeidim etc, yet why should there be, at the onset, a supposition that they could, G-d forbid, destroy the Yidden - that we needed to give thanks and praise to G-d for that which he “saved
Particularly, since the world and all that is in it, was created on behalf of the Yidden, as it states: “In the beginning of God’Seder creation that God created the world for the sake of the Torah, etc. and for the sake of Israel, who are called (Jer. 2:3) “the first of His grain.”
That the purpose of the entire being (including the nations of the world) is in order to effect this – to help the Yidden
Indeed, the reason why they do not realize this and it is not visible is understood – because it is in order that there be a place for choice, for the Avodah of iskafia and ishapcha etc. this however, does not change the true aspect. And the deliverance from the “standing is an aspect that cannot be different
2. the whole aspect of “not “ since it states explicitly that “evey “ indeed what relation is there specifically to the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim and why is this nusach stated only in the Haggadah on the night of Pesach and not in other times of deliverance and salvation (like on purim and other days)
On the contrary:
In the Galut of Mitzrayim, there was not the aspect of “stand as it states later on in the Haggadah that “Pharaoh had issued a decree against the male children only, but Laban wanted to uproot everyone - as it is said: "The Aramean wished to destroy my father; ”
Similarly this was in the time of Achashverosh when the decree was on all the Yidden
8. “built for us the Beit Habechirah to atone for all our sins” וּבָנָה לָנוּ אֶת-בֵּית הַבְּחִירָה לְכַפֵּר עַל-כָּל-עֲוֹנוֹתֵינוּ
1, in all of the fourteen previous “levels of favors/ma’a lot” (כַּמָה מַעֲלוֹת טוֹבוֹת לַמָּקוֹם עָלֵינוּ
) the reason for the virtue is not explained - and in certain of the virtues, the commentators struggle () to clarify the reason for the virtue (for example: if G-d
- And specifically when it comes to the last of the virtues “and built for us the Beit HaBechirah to atone for all our sins, is the reason of the virtue cited and translated
2. and if the reason for the virtue is indeed explained (for whatever reason), nevertheless this reason, is extremely simple and is stated explicitly in the verse “make dwell
The primary aspect of the Mikdash is the resting of the Shechinah (and even though the verse speaks of the Mishkan, and the Baal Haggadah speaks concerning the virtue of the Beit HaBechirah after they entered the Land – nevertheless, it is the opposite: the virtue of the Beit HaMikdash (even over that of the Mishkan) is indeed, in that which the resting of the Shechinah was there so much so that the revelation of G-dliness was tangible (ten miracles were wrought for our fathers in the Beit HaMikdash ) – therefore why specifically is this reason of “to atone” chosen?
In addition to that which “I will dwell among you” is a primary aspect of the Baal Haggadah, it is also a virtue that is related to all the Yidden (even for those who do not need atonement) however, the “atone” is a virtue which relates only to those that need an atonement on sins
4. why does he precisely use the expression “Beit HaBechirah” and not the common expression Baal Haggadah, or something similar
5, and mainly:
How is the last virtue (build) related to Yetzias Mitzrayim and the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim?
One can understood the other virtues until “entered” can be understood, since for the entire duration in the desert and since they had not yet entered the settled land – the Geulah and leaving Mitzrayim was not yet complete. And this is also manifested in the expressions of Geulah – take
Which G-d said to Moshe in Mitzrayim, he immediately continued and stated “and I will bring you to the land etc.”, However the building of the Beit HaBechirah in Yerushalayim seemingly has no relation with the aspect of the Geulah.
9. The explanation of all this is:
When we sit at the seder and on must beginning to recite the Haggadah, before even that the son (who is the focus of the Haggadah – you shall tell your son) has an understanding in the particulars of the aspect of the servitude and the miracles and wonders of the Geulah, he has many questions which must be answered even before the reciting of the Haggadah of “We were slaves”:
1. Why is the Geulah of Yetzias Mitzrayim not in a regular manner? If the Geulah would be from a mortal person, it is understood that just as he himself (is a limited being and) withstands changes, so too also here, is there a change and exchange in his deeds. However since the Geulah of Yetzias Mitzrayim was from G-d, who is the true G-d, and all of His deeds are true and eternal, therefore the deliverance from Mitzrayim should be an eternal Geulah. Therefore how is it that we find ourselves in Galut? And not just a plain Galut, but in such a bitter Galut that “every “ which is similar (and even more so ) to the Galut and servitude of Mitzrayim
2. Since the Yidden came out of Mitzrayim with “great wealth” as G-d promised, why therefore is there poverty by Yidden (as he sits by the Seder table and there are “those that need and want” Whoever is hungry, let him come and eat; whoever is in need, – Orchim and poor people_
The mitzvah of the Haggadah at the Seder – tell – is according to four sons that one finds at the seder table not just a wise son but also a rasha ( and a tam and ).
This is hard to understand:
It is known that the Reshaim that were in that generation were not redeemed and did not leave Mitzrayim (they died in the three days of darkness) therefore since the Yidden who came out of Mitzrayim were not Reshaim – therefore how is it possible that there is a rasha among the Yidden
(And one cannot say that the rasha of the Haggadah who sits at the table is not of the same sort of rashaim that died in Mitzrayim during the three days of darkness, since the Haggadah explicitly states the answer to the ben rasha “if
And these questions are not just plain questions that come from intellect and understanding, but they contradict the entire topic of the Seder and the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim, whose aspect is “in every
And therefore “one must
And Torah is the Torah of truth, therefore it must be in a true manner and with a true feeling. However, how can Yidden have the feeling of freedom in such a manner that he is truthfully “as if
When he finds himself in Galut, in a manner which” In every generation a person is obligated to regard himself as if he had come out of Egypt, as it is said: "You shall tell your child on that day, in every בְּכָל-דּוֹר וָדוֹר חַיָּב אָדָם לִרְאוֹת אֶת-עַצְמוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הוּא יָצָא מִמִּצְרַיִם
And there are poor people among Yidden, actual poor people and people who are poor in knowledge, so much so that there is a ben rasha
10. in order to nullify this confusion, one prefaces the Haggadah with the passage This is the bread of affliction. This is also a preface which explains the general topic of the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim which begins with “We were slaves”.
The matzah that our fathers ate after their leaving Mitzrayim (they rise) is called in the passage
And this explains the continuation of the passage: “all “the reason that there is the situation of poor people, and the existence of “now:” that we are still in Galut and in servitude – stems from that which “Our father (were) in the land of Mitzrayim” meaning that the Yidden, then, did not (completely) go out of the servitude of Mitzrayim.
The question arises:
If this is so, what did the aspect of Yetzias Mitzrayim accomplish, because of which we must conduct a seder “in a manner of freedom” - therefore it continues and states that it is indeed “now we are here (however) next year : the Geulah of Mitzrayim opened the way and the conduit of Geulah which leads to the complete Geulah - “next
And therefore one can now fulfill the mitzvah of story of Yetzias Mitzrayim on this night and the obligation
And on the contrary, through the fulfillment of the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim and in a manner that “as if
And the general point, which is immediately brought out at the opening of Maggid - to resolve the aforementioned question, is emphasized and detailed in the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim, after the question of Mah Nishtana, as will be explained.
11. It is known that which the sages state that G-d gave Avraham a choice” what
And Avraham (or G-d - according to the two opinions in this) chose Galut instead of Gehinom
From this it is understood that essence of the aspect of Galut, and at the head, the Galut of Mitzrayim, is the same aspect and essence of Gehinom – the cleansing and atonement of sin
The sin (plainly) over which we had to be cleansed of, was the (root and source of all the sins, the) First Sin – the Sin of the Tree of Knowledge, which caused the departure of the Shechinah from the earth to the firmament. Therefore the cleansing for this was stated to Avraham. since after the sin of the Tree of Knowledge, which caused the departure of the Shechinah from the earth to the firmament, there was another six sins, of which, each of them caused the departure of the one firmament to another firmament, so much so until it reached the seventh firmament. and the first one who began to draw back down the Shechinah from above to below was Avraham Avinu (who drew down the Shechinah from the seventh firmament to the sixth firmament). Therefore it was specifically told to him, that the completion of the cleansing and the refinement and polishing of the sim, which would cause the descending of the Shechinah as it was before the sin, would be accomplished through Galut Mitzrayim.
If we would have merited it, the Galut of Mitzrayim would have been the last Galut, the only Galut – and therefore the Geulah of Mitzrayim would have been a complete Geulah as it states: “ - it would have been as it was before the sin
However, since in actuality, Galut Mitzrayim did not accomplish the cleansing and complete atonement, as will be discussed, therefore it had to be that “ G-d took us out of there with a strong hand” – against the Midah of Din. Since from the perspective of the attribute of judgement and accounting the claim is accepted that since the purpose and intent of Galut and servitude of Mitzrayim – is to effect the refinement and polishing of the Yidden ( and the world) so much so that it comes to the condition before the sin – it was not yet carried out completely. Therefore the going out and Geulah has no place.
12. with this one can explain the precise wording “and G-d str ong “ – that the exodus from Mitzrayim was because of G-d ‘Seder doing.
From their condition, the Yidden were not completely fitting for this. And according to what is known that the Yidden, in Mitzrayim, had sunk, G-d forbid, to the forty ninth gate of impurity () and if they had remained in Mitzrayim, for even one moment more, they would, G-d forbid, not have been redeemed.
In the words of Chassidut, as the Alter Rebbe explains:
The reason that Yetzias Mitzrayim was in a manner that “ fled” ( as the verse states) is because “ the evil that was in the nefashot of Yisroel was still strong in the left side “ () and the Geulah came from that which “ G-d revealed”
This grasped their essence of Judaism () . and they could no longer fool themselves from the spirit of folly which “covers the truth”. In that condition they can be connected to G-d – and this effected the “fleeing of the people” ( similar to what is explained in Tanya that even a kal kalim (where the level of Chochmah/wisdom of the G-d ly soul is in a level of Galut and sleep_ when they encounter a test in a matter of faith, which resides in the level of Chochmah of the soul, “Is awakened from it sit sleep and accomplished its effect” and they also have Mesirat nefesh for the sanctification of
13. Therefore it says, “if G-d not take us out” . for if the exodus was not from G-d’Seder part, the Galut of Mitzrayim would have endured until the refinement and polishing would be complete – until the future Geulah.
And this is even more pronounced and emphasized according to the (first) other view that of “begins with shame and ends with praise” – “In the beginning our fathers served idols” and now . the bringing close to G-d is also now (not due to their standing and condition, but) because “ G-d brought
Therefore it is ujj there can be the existence of a ben rasha even now, after Geulat Mitzrayim and also why there can be a condition of “in every generation” and this is not realized because “ G-d saved us “ – because as aforementioned as long as the refinement and polishing is not carried out, according to its direction and purpose – the Yidden from their aspect and level are not yet completely refined and polished from evil (so much so that there is a ben rasha) and therefore from the perspective of the Midah of judgment there is a place that “stand
14. However, the question arises:
How is it possible that Yidden should be able to be so much “sunk” into impurity and the evil of Mitzrayim, so much so that they, of their own accord and being, are not able to go out of Mitzrayim? To avert this question the Baal Haggadah continues and stresses “ and they “. This explanation of this is that the Mitzrayim made us to be their “friends” (which is why it states “us” (), not “to us” (). The Mitzrayim effected in the Yidden so much evil that, the Yidden of their own accord, would not be able to attain (more than the level of “evil” which needed to be refined through the Galut and servitude of Mitzrayim).
This is similar to the answer to the question – why pharaoh and the Mitzrayim were punished, since they just carried out the decree of “serve” . (one of the answers to this is) that the punishment for this cme because the Yidden endured the hardship of the servitude which was not part of the Supernal decree/
15. However, after all the aforementioned, one could begin to ask:
Since the Galut of Mitzrayim, at the end of it all, did effect the proper refinement and uplifting, in what is the great ra’ash? etc. and virtue of Yetzias Mitzrayim and the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim? On this one concludes with praise “and built for us the Beit HaBechirah to atone for all our sins.
The true aspect of choice is specifically in such a manner, when the object is chosen, not because of causes and reasons, but only because of the free choice of the chooser. And this choice is only relevant to G-d. for concerning G-d, it is entirely not applicable that a being outside of him, G-d forbid, should be of any concern ()
And from G-d perspective it is “Was not Esau a brother to Jacob? says the Lord.
And specifically because of G-d’Seder free choice – did He choose the nation of Yisroel – “And I loved Jacob . . and I hated Esau,
This means that the root and true aspect of the choice is due to that which the Yidden are one entity, as it were, with G-d – as it states Yisroel and G-d are entirely one. And this revelation of the choice below is in a manner that outwardly and visibly it appears that “Was not Esau a brother to Jacob” – namely that they are both equal. Yet nevertheless, “And I loved Jacob”
And this is the essence of the aspect of Galut and Yetzias Mitzrayim:
Outwardly and visibly - as this is revealed in the world (seder Hishtalshelut) where, there it is with a “strong hand” “opposed to the Midah of judgement “ – this was in a manner that if they had remained in Mitzrayim, even one moment more, they would not have been redeemed. For at their level, they were not fit to leave Mitzrayim – “brother
However, in pnimiyut, and truthfully, this comes from G-d, who with His choice, chose the (souls) of Yisroel, because they are one entity () with G-d and “I am not able to exchange them with another nation “
16, according to this it is also understood that through the aspect of the Beit HaBechirah, it accomplishes the “to atone
(not just selc and) and this level of seder Hishtalshelut, where it is not visible that Yidden are one entity, as it were, with G-d (similar to that which a son below who is separated from his father) and where the aspect of the sin matters and affects, there one must effect atonement to remove the soil and defect through the servitude and Galut. However, from the perspective of the essential bond of the Yidden with G-d through “choice” it is – “to atone (truthfully and completely) on “. For at that level the atonement and cleansing of the sin is accomplished automatically, for that is the level where, a sin and transgression does not, at the onset, cause affect. And this also effects on their being, visibly, that even from the perspective of their being – they become refined and the cleansing of the soul, takes place.
It is only that when it comes into time, is it with an order and boundary (). In the time of Galut and Yetzias Mitzrayim, the Geulah is seen as it is in Seder Hishtalshelut that “the people fled” and it had to be “with a strong hand”. And this revelation, as it came from G-d’Seder choice, from G-d’Seder essence and effected the conclusion and completeness of the atonement was when “built for us the Beit HaBechirah to atone for all our sins”
And this is also connected with the actual Beit HaBechirah, where the atonement was achieved not through servitude and afflictions etc., but through the Korbanot. For in the Beit (HaBechirah) HaMikdash the choice of G-d was revealed.
And one could say that this is the inner explanation of “begins with shame and ends with praise. in the beginning of the Haggadah and the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim it stresses that the exodus came from Above, as if from the perspective of below – the Yidden were not fit to be redeemed ( as aforementioned, at length) and one “concludes with praise” and even here below, the true aspect is revealed – the Beit HaMikdash.
17. And through the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim and in a manner of “to show
One merits that “in Nissan we will be redeemed” will actually be fulfilled in this Nissan. like the view of R’ Yehoshua ( whose view is accordingly decided and accepted in the Midrash, ) that ““In Nissan our forefathers were redeemed from Egypt, and in Nissan we will be redeemed.”
That the Geulah comes from a place which is “completely above an awakening from below (), meaning that it is even above the level of teshuva. For from that level it “gives birth to a male” () – a Geulah that has an existence, an eternal Geulah, even when the man gives his seed first, it comes from above
This becomes “next year in Yerushalayim”’
As the Rebbe Rayatz explains that it is not that one must wait, G-d forbid, until the next year, but that it will immediately happen in this Nissan, and automatically will one be, in the next year, in the land of Yisroel, and free people () and “we
Msichas second night of Pesach 5726
|Date Modified:||Date Reviewed:|