|
Vol 12.05 - Chag HaPesach Spanish French Audio Video |
| Hebrew Text:
Page 39 Page40 Page41 Page42 Page43 Page44 Page45 Page46 Page47 Page48 |
|
Summary: "In every generation one is obligated to view himself etc" (Rambam Hil. Chametz u'Matzah 7:6). Explanation of Rambam in the aforementioned halacha and the differences to the Alter Rebbe's Shulchan Aruch 472:7) (Vol. XII, 12 Pg. 39)
|
|
Translation: 1. Rambam writes (Hilchot Chametz U'Matzah 7:6): “In each and every generation, a person is obligated to show himself (להראות את עצמו) as if he, himself, has now left the slavery of Egypt” (And he cites a proof for this from Scripture, "He took us out from there." (Deut. 6:23) and from the verse, "Remember that you were a slave (Deut. 5:15)" – as will be explained in Par. 3) The source for this law (“In every generation a person is obligated etc.”) is (as it cited in the Maggid Mishneh) from the Mishnah in tractate Pesachim. This requires explanation: The text of the Mishnah (according to our version, and this is also the version in the handwritten version of Mishnah that Rambam wrote) is: “A person is obligated to see himself etc. (לראות) etc.” In this, there is an actual ramification in law. For the wording of Rambam, “a person is obligated to show himself” means that it is not sufficient that a person sees (regards himself) as if he went out from the slavery of explanation, but rather that he is obligated to display this also to others? Moreover, it is not understood: Seemingly, Rambam’s words itself are contradictory:
This same question is also in the words of the Alter Rebbe:
2. There is another change in the wording of Rambam and the Alter Rebbe that differ from the words of the Mishnah (and their Haggadah).
Seemingly: The addition of the words “himself” and “now” - are, at least, not a change in the main portent. It is just an addition and emphasis in the “as if he went out”. For the explanation of this is “as if he himself went out now”. (Moreover, the reason that this emphasis is not also included in the text of their Haggadah, is because the section “In every generation etc.” in the Haggadah is (taken) from the wording of the Mishnah (and in the saying “Thus it is our duty to thank etc., that follows). Therefore, there is no reason to change). However, one must examine that which is written, “went out now from the subjugation of Egypt”: The wording of the Mishnah, “a person is obligated to regard himself as if he had come out from Egypt”, implies that he must see himself as if he went out of the land of Egypt. Whereas “subjugation of Egypt” is possible to be, and actually was, outside of the land of Egypt? 3. In Rambam there (7:6) where he writes, “In every generation a person is obligated . . from the subjugation of Egypt” he concludes: “As it states, “He took us out from there etc.”. Regarding this manner, G-d commanded in the Torah: "Remember that you were a slave" - i.e., as if you, yourself, were a slave and went out to freedom and were redeemed”. This is not understood:
“You shall tell your child on that day, it is because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt.” And although the Rambam’s handwritten version of the (aforementioned) Mishnah, and also in the text of his Haggadah that is taken from the Mishnah, it does not cite, at all, a proof for this Din, nevertheless, it requires explanation: What is Rambam’s reason that the proof of the Din is (specifically) from the verse, “He took us out from there” and not from the verse, “You shall tell your child on that day, it is because of this that the L-rd did for me etc..” (like the version in the Mishnah)?
It is not understood: The commandment of, “Remember that you were a slave . . i.e., as if you, yourself, were a slave and went out to freedom and were redeemed” has no unique time in the year (which is the reason for keeping Shabbat, “You must surely present him with a severance bonus etc.“) Whereas the obligation “to show as if he himself went out now from the subjugation of Egypt” is specifically on the night of the fifteenth of Nissan? 4. This aforementioned law in Rambam, namely “In every generation a person is obligated” (not just to regard himself, but also)”to show etc.”, is also cited by the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch (as was mentioned in the end of Par. 1): However, with regard to the source of this Halacha in the Torah (in other words, the verse from which we derive this law), the Alter Rebbe changes from what Rambam writes) (even though (in general) the Alter Rebbe takes this Halacha from Rambam, as it is cited in the source-margin there)
The reason for this difference – is understood simply: The Alter Rebbe maintains (like he places in the text of his Haggadah) that the (primary) version in the (aforementioned ) Mishnah is like the version in most sefarim (books), namely: “In every generation a person is obligated . . as it is said: “You shall tell your child on that day, it is because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt.” (And not like the view of Rambam that the Mishnah does not cite a proof for this law) Therefore, he also writes in his Shulchan Aruch that this Halacha is derived from the verse “It is because of this because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt.” However, this itself (that they differ with regard to the version) requires explanation: Moreover, one must examine: Why does the Alter Rebbe just cite “It is because of this because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt” and he omits the (beginning) words of that verse, “You shall tell your child on that day” which are indeed cited in the Mishnah? One cannot say that the Alter Rebbe’s proof is (not to obligate one to show (להראות) in each generation, but rather) just on that which the entity (המציאות) of Yetziat Mitzrayim exists in each generation. Which is why he omits “You shall tell your child” – For (in addition to that which it is not understood: why does he also not cite the proof for the obligation, for) according to this, he should have just cited the words, “the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt”, and also omit the words “It is because of this”? 5. Another difference in the Alter Rebbe’s Shulchan Aruch versus that of Rambam is: The wording of Rambam is, "Regarding this matter, God commanded in the Torah: 'Remember that you were a slave' i.e., as if you, yourself, were a slave etc.” Whereas the wording of the Alter Rebbe is: "Regarding this matter, God commanded in the Torah: 'Remember that you were a slave in Egypt, as if you, yourself, were a slave in Egypt etc.” Since it is known that the Alter Rebbe was precise in each one of his ‘golden words’, it clearly appears that the reason that the Alter Rebbe, (differs from the wording of Rambam) and adds the words, “in Egypt” (both in the citing of the wording of the verse, “Remember etc.” as well as in the explanation, “as if”), is that his intent is to tell us that the obligation of “a person must show himself” (להראות את עצמו) is (not just that he should see himself “as if you yourself were a (plain) slave”, but) that he should see himself “as if you, yourself, were a slave in Egypt etc.”. Namely, that the servitude of Egypt is a unique subjugation – it was backbreaking etc. (One could say that that this detail (according to the Alter Rebbe’s view) is also restrictive (לעיכובא). For if one imagines himself, that he was redeemed from plain servitude – he has not fulfilled his obligation). One must examine, how does the Alter Rebbe know to differentiate from Rambam and to innovate that a person is obligated the show himself as if he was redeemed from the specific servitude of Egypt? One must also understand:
7. The explanation of all the aforementioned is: In the law (of Rambam and of the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch) “In every generation a person is obligated to show himself (להראות) as if he, himself, has now left the slavery of Egypt”, many aspects are innovated:
The reason that we are now found in a condition of freedom – is because the Geulah of Yetziat Mitzrayim continues even now.
(in addition to the Mitzvah of remembering the exodus from Egypt every day (in the day as well as the night). Namely that this Mitzvah is fulfilled even when he (just) mentions the exodus from Egypt which occurred with our ancestors) there is an obligation on a person to see himself (and feel) “as if he himself went out now from the subjugation of Egypt”.
This obligation is not just during the time of the recital of the Haggadah, but rather it is also “in all the deeds of this night”. In other words, even though he recites in the Haggadah “In every generation . . as if he had come out of Egypt”, (and even before this he says, “If the Holy One, blessed be He, had not taken our fathers out of Egypt, then we . .would have remained etc.”) nevertheless, he has still not fulfilled the obligation to show (even though the reciting of the Haggadah is telling it to another, as will be explained Par. 8) Rather, he is required also to “eat and drink .. in a manner of freedom” in order to express and show this feeling of “as if he himself had come out etc.” and this is “in all the deeds of this night”. 7. According to this, it is understood why Rambam and the Alter Rebbe needed to also cite the verse, “Remember that you were a slave”, and they did not suffice with the proof from the verse “He took us out from there etc.” or from the verse, “it is because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt”. For the proof of these verses is just on the entity (המציאות), namely that the Geulah of Yetziat Mitzrayim is a continuous action in every generation. However, there is no proof from this, that there is an obligation for the person to regard himself “as if he himself went out now from the subjugation of Egypt”. For even though the entity of Yetziat Mitzrayim is in every generation, nevertheless on could say that the obligation of remembering Yetziat Mitzrayim is just to remember the exodus from Egypt as it was literally – for our forefathers. (and even though the words, “the L-rd did for me”, come in continuation to the words, “You shall tell your child”; and the words, “He took us out from there” come in continuation to what is stated before this, namely: “and you shall say to your son”. This is just with regard to telling and reciting. For in the story of Yetziat Mitzrayim, one must also say “to me” and “we”. However, there is no proof from this that a person is obligated to see himself (to feel) “as if he himself went out now from the subjugation of Egypt”. And certainly – there is no proof from this that there is an obligation on the person to see “to regard himself as if he had come out of Egypt” even with regard to the other deeds of this night, which are not during the recital of the Haggadah). Therefore, Rambam and the Alter Rebbe add, “Regarding this matter, God commanded in the Torah: "Remember that you were a slave i.e., as if you, yourself, etc.”. For the command (and especially since it repeats) “Remember that you were a slave” is (not just to remember Yetziat Mitzrayim that occurred with our forefathers, but also) “on this matter”- namely on the aspect of “He took us out from there” and “the L-rd did for me”. After we know from the verse “Remember etc.”, that a person is obligated to remember (and to see oneself) “as if you, yourself, etc” – we learn from this, that this obligation on the night of Pesach must be not just “to regard oneself” but also “to show”. Moreover, that this obligation is (not just at the time of the recital of the Haggadah, but) even “when a person feasts on this night”, as will be explained. 8. Among the additions of the Mitzvah of the telling of Yetziat Mitzrayim on the night of the fifteenth of Nissan over the Mitzvah of remembering Yetziat Mitzrayim every day is – “you shall tell your child”: This means that it is not sufficient to remember Yetziat Mitzrayim personally (לעצמו), but rather one must tell this also (to his son, or) to another (לאחר). (This is the reason why it states that if one does not have a son or a wife etc. that he should ask himself – “he asks himself”. For since the obligation on the night of Pesach is to recount Yetziat Mitzrayim to another, Therefore, (if one does not have someone to ask him) he must ask himself. For by asking himself, he becomes “another” with regard to himself. By answering his own questions and telling the “other” of himself, with this he fulfills the Mitzvah of “and you shall tell etc.”). Since we find that in one detail of the general aspects of remembering Yetziat Mitzrayim (the story) – that the night of Yetziat Mitzrayim adds the obligation of specifically the “other”, we learn from this (according to Rambam and the Alter Rebbe) with regard to the entire general matter. Even on the detail that one must see himself “as if he had gone out”, namely that this must specifically be to an other – to show. Also in “all the deeds of this night”. 9. According to the aforementioned, also the precise wording of the golden words of the Alter Rebbe, in writing, “as it states, ‘it is because of this that the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt’", is understood - Even though, seemingly, as aforementioned,
for through this he emphasizes that the relation of the obligation “to show” to the verse “You shall tell your child” is not to the command (and the detail) of “You shall tell” but rather to the “It is because of this” – the general time (of which it states, “You shall tell” – to another) – “when Matzah and Maror are placed before you”, every deed of remembering the exodus of Egypt must be in a manner of “other”. 10, According to the aforementioned, namely that the obligation ”to show”, is just on the night of Pesach, but that the obligation of the whole year (that is derived from the command “Remember etc.”) is just to “see oneself” – this answers why it states in the Mishnah and accordingly in the text of the Haggadah of Rambam and the Alter Rebbe, “a person is obligated to see” (even though the obligation is also “to show”). For the intent of this section is – a preface and reason to the section after it, “Therefore (לפיכך), (which is explained before this) “we are obligated .. to thank” (on this night). It is not to explain the obligations of the night, but rather the great aspect of Yetziat Mitzrayim. For this exodus is “in every generation”, without distinction and in the days of each generation. Therefore, “a person is obligated to see himself” (constantly) “as if he had come out of Egypt”. The reason that we do not mention in “the Haggadah”, the obligation “to show” on the night of Pesach -resembles that which we do not mention the obligation of the four cups etc. The reason simply is because we actually do this. This is the reason with regard to the obligation of “to show” – for the recital and telling etc. to another (as aforementioned par 8) is the actual deed of “to show”. 11. However, it is still not understood: The source of the law that “In every generation a person is obligated etc.” is from the Mishnah. Therefore, since the wording of the Mishnah (according to the version of the Rambam and the Alter Rebbe) is “one is obligated to see oneself etc.”, how do Rambam and the Alter Rebbe learn from the Talmud that there is an obligation also to show? The explanation of this is: In the Talmud there it states: “Rava said: When mentioning the exodus from Egypt one must say: And He took us out from there” Seemingly, what does this add to the statement of the Mishnah, “In every generation a person is obligated to regard himself as if he had come out of Egypt”? The explanation of this is: The wording “us” (“He took us out”, in the plural) depicts that at the time of the recital, there is another person there. This is why “one must say, “He took us out from there” – like the explanation of the Rashbam: One must show himself as if he went out of there. Therefore, it is understood that the law: “one must say: And He took us out from there” (in the plural) is not a detail of “You shall tell your child” – For in “You shall tell your child”, even if he says it in the singular (בלשון יחיד) (“and he took me out”), there is another – but rather – this is an independent matter. From this, Rambam and the Alter Rebbe derive the obligation of “to show”. Moreover, that this obligation concerns “all the deeds of this night”. 12, The reason that Rambam and the Alter Rebbe write that the obligation is “as if he had come out of (just) from the subjugation Egypt” – even though the wording of the Mishnah is (and also what is placed in the text of the Haggadah) “went out of Egypt” is because: Since the intent of the Mishnah in “one is obligated to see oneself as if he had come out of Egypt” (as Rambam and the Alter Rebbe explain) is that one must regard himself as if he had come out now, (In other words, that in moment before this, he was in Egypt, and he is, just now, going from there) – Therefore, it is impossible to say that the intent of “went out from there” is that he is going out (now) from the place of the land of Egypt. For this is contrary to what is felt (המוחש). (And especially since we are commanded “you will never again see them, even to eternity” – not to return to Egypt. According to this command, it is not applicable (and certainly that there is no place to obligate) that one should see himself, a moment before, as if he was in Egypt). Therefore, one must say that the intent of “went out of Egypt” is the going out of the servitude of Egypt. 13. One could say that the reason for the differences (that are aforementioned in par 4 and 5) between the wording of the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch versus the wording of Rambam is:
is that these differences correspond to their different views in the version of the Mishnah.
One could say that his reasoning is that, one could say that the verse is literal (כפשוטו), namely that it was said to the generation that left Egypt. Therefore, even in his sefer, Rambam cites the verse “He took us out from there etc.” For this explains (and we also say this in the Haggadah) “so that He might bring us to give us the land etc.” For most, if not all of those that entered the Land were not from those who left Egypt.
14. One could say that this difference, namely, whether the aspect of “In every generation etc” is derived from the verse “the L-rd did for me” or if it is derived from the verse, “He took us out from there”, also has a ramification in Halacha/Din: The explanation of this is: From the verse “He took us out from there” we just know that the aspect of “He took us out from there” (in general) also pertains to the later generations – “us”. However, there is no proof from this that the verse, “He took us out from there” refers to the same manner in which He took out our ancestors. This is not so from the verse “the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt”. For since it says “me” and not “us”, in other words, that verse emphasizes that it is speaking of such an aspect that just the father (who was in Egypt) is able to feel, and not the son, this proves that the intent is to the original exodus from Egypt that occurred to our forefathers. Therefore, since the verse is also speaking of the later generations (as we say “on that day”) it proves that the exodus from Egypt in every generation is like “the L-rd did for me when I left Egypt” - namely in the same manner that occurred the first time.
Whereas from the verse “the L-rd did for me etc.” (that is cited in the Alter Rebbe‘s Shulchan Aruch, from the Mishnah) it also proves that the exodus from Egypt in every generation is equal to the exodus that occurred at the first time. 15. According to the aforementioned, it is also understood why:
The explanation of this is: In Hilchot Shmittah v’Yovel, Rambam writes: “From Rosh Hashanah until Yom Kippur, servants would not be released to their homes, nor would they be subjugated to their masters . . When Yom Kippur arrives and the shofar is sounded in the court, the servants are released to their homes etc.” From this is appears that in every exodus from slavery there are two aspects:
One could say that in every emancipation, this is so. However, it is not a law. Whereas in the Yovel – and Torah speaks to the majority- first there is the emancipation and afterward one goes from the house of the master and returns to his own home. This is why Rambam (in Hil. Chametz u’Matzah, ibid) after writing “and he goes out to freedom” adds “and he is redeemed” (for it is a Mitzvah to tell and explanation the exodus of Egypt). For “went out to freedom” (just) explains that he is not subjugated to his master. Therefore, he adds “and is redeemed” – for he is (also) leaves to his home. For “redemption” (פדות) means separation (הבדלה). In our case, it means the separation from the place and domain of the master (in other words, he is released to his home). 16. Among the aspects in slavery of Egypt, compared to the other subjugations is: As long as a slave was in the land of Egypt, it was not possible that he should be emancipated and made a free person. Only after the slave fled Egypt and reached “Pi HaChirot” – did he then become a free man. According to this, we find that the order of “going out to freedom” and “redemption” in the Geulah of the servitude of Egypt, was in an opposite manner from the Geulah from general servitude.
According to this the difference between the wording of the Alter Rebbe versus the wording of Rambam, is understood:
For according to Rambam’s view, the obligation of “Remember etc.” is “as if you, yourself, were a slave” (a slave, without qualification). Therefore, in the going out from general slavery – first there is the “going out to freedom” and afterward the “redemption”. Whereas according to the view of the Alter Rebbe that the obligation of “Remember etc.” is “as if you, yourself, were a slave in Egypt”. Therefore, the order is first "you were redeemed” (and afterward) “went out to freedom”. For in the going out from the slavery of Egypt, in the beginning there is the “redemption” and afterward the “going out to freedom”. May it be G-d’s Will that soon, mamosh, we will merit the freedom of the true and complete Geulah, through our righteous Moshiach. m’Sichas Yud-Alef Nisan and Acharon Shel Pesach 5735
|
|
Links:
|
| Date Delivered: | Reviewer: | ||
| Date Modified: | Date Reviewed: | ||
| Contributor: |