Transcript

הלכה א' מצות עשה של תורה לספר בנסים ונפלאות שנעשו לאבותינו במצרים בחמישה עשר בניסן שנאמר זכור את היום הזה אשר יצאתם ממצרים כמו שנאמר זכור את יום השבת. הלכה ב' מצוה להודיע לבנים ואפילו לא שאלו שנאמר והגדת לבנך ולפי דעתו של בן אביו מלמדו. כיצד? אם היה קטן או טיפש אומר לו בני כולנו היינו עבדים כמו שפחה זו או כמו עבד זה במצרים ובלילה הזה פדה אותנו הקדוש ברוך הוא ויוציאנו לחירות.

So on the one hand in Halacha Aleph the Rambam defines the mitzvah in terms of nissim veniflaos. It's not, he doesn't tell the story of the Exodus, right? The Rambam says lesaper benissim veniflaos. There's a very clear focused definition. The Rambam says the pesukim in Parshas Va'etchanan seem to indicate as much. ויוציאנו ה' משם ביד חזקה ובזרוע נטויה. How does the pasuk go by the ben chacham in Va'etchanan? Let me look at what the pasuk is, I'm sorry.

כי ישאלך בנך פרק ו' פסוק כ' כי ישאלך בנך מחר לאמר מה העדות והחוקים והמשפטים אשר צוה ה' אלהינו אתכם ואמרת לבנך עבדים היינו לפרעה במצרים ויוציאנו ה' ממצרים ביד חזקה ויתן ה' אותות ומופתים גדולים ורעים במצרים בפרעה ובכל ביתו לעינינו.

So all these terms yad chazaka, osos umofsim, gedolim vera'im, all are a focus lichora on nissim veniflaos. So lichora that's where the Rambam gets it. But be that as it may, whatever the makor is. So how do you understand Halacha Beis? בן קטן או טיפש, so there's no mention of nissim. So you'll say no, because the בן קטן או טיפש doesn't understand the concept of a miracle. Okay, itachen that that's the case. But then lichora it should be like I guess a קטן שהיה יכול לאכול כזית, so you're not mechanech him for mitzvas matzah because he's not yet at an age. And let's say the בן קטן או טיפש, let's say he's not a בן קטן או טיפש, but he's a katan that he's six months old. So he can't understand that היינו עבדים כמו שפחה זו או כמו עבד זה. So what do you do? You don't do anything. The child has yet to reach an age where the father can be mekayem, since the child is not capable of understanding the sippur, so the father has no mitzvah to engage in sippur. So if that's the case, given that the definition is lesaper benissim veniflaos, so what that the katan, that you're dealing with a katan who due to age or due to whatever deficit doesn't understand nissim? So that doesn't mean you give him a different version of the story. It should mean that he's not at a stage where the mitzvah applies for vehigadta levincha. So that's what we were saying yesterday again. So when the Rambam quotes לפי דעתו של בן אביו מלמדו, it's not a that that din is not, it's not again, it is also an insight into pedagogy, but it's a halacha that sippur yetzias Mitzrayim is on a sliding scale. לפי דעתו של בן אביו מלמדו is gezeiras hakasuv, is a din that sippur yetzias Mitzrayim is on a sliding scale. The Rambam in Halacha Aleph was not talking about the reach. reaching out to the son. The Rambam's original pasuk, the way he sequences things here in the Yad, I think he does things differently in Sefer Hamitzvos, but the way he's doing things here in the Yad is the initial pasuk is זכור את היום הזה. It's got nothing to do with what someone is telling anyone else about the sippur. It's a person engaging in sippur for himself. So you're talking about someone who's a gadol. So someone who's a gadol, so the definition of the mitzvah is lisaper benissim venifla'os. Now there is a gezeiras hakasuv, there is a din of לפי דעתו של בן אביו מלמדו that the sippur that is on a sliding scale and that's why the the bar is set lower than than the ability to understand what nissim venifla'os are. The bar is set that if the child can understand that

היינו עבדים כשפחה זו כעבד זה ובלילה הזה הקדוש ברוך הוא פדה אותנו,

that's where the bar is set based on the gezeiras hakasuv of לפי דעתו של בן אביו מלמדו. And that's what we said, it's the same gezeiras hakasuv that tells you that that even that a ben gadol again has to reach has to reach higher also in terms of his his level of the sippur. Halacha Gimmel.

וצריך לעשות שינוי בלילה הזה כדי שיראו הבנים וישאלו ויאמרו מה נשתנה הלילה הזה מכל הלילות עד שישיב להם ויאמר להם כך וכך אירע וכך וכך היה. וכיצד משנה מחלק להם קליות ואגוזים ועוקר השולחן מלפניהם קודם שיאכלו וחוטפין מצה זה מיד זה וכיוצא בדברים האלו. אין לו בן אשתו שואלתו. אין לו אשה שואלין זה לזה מה נשתנה הלילה הזה ואפילו היו כולן חכמים.

slicha. sorry sorry.

אין לו אשה שואלין זה לזה מה נשתנה הלילה הזה ואפילו היו כולן חכמים. היה לבדו שואל לעצמו מה נשתנה הלילה הזה.

Halacha Daled, again just just reading the first few words, וצריך להתחיל בגנות ולסיים בשבח. What's what's the mashma'os of tzarich? On the one hand it's obviously doesn't have the same force as chayav or mitzvah. On the other hand it's obviously not just a eitza tova kemashma'os and it does have some sense of of being required. What's the mashma'os of tzarich? Now Halacha Gimmel in a vacuum, so I think maybe we would have said that the mashma'os of tzarich maybe stands in contradistinction. But lichora that doesn't that's that's not an adequate answer because the Rambam begins halacha daled with tzorech and that's what we saw for instance Rabbeinu Manoach. Yeah we talked about this, yeah, מצה ומרור נאכלים כאחד. So Rabbeinu Manoach says, you know, this is a din d'oraisa, that משכו וקחו לכם צאן למשפחותיכם is a din d'oraisa. I think the mahalach we said also suggests that it's certainly not a hamtzo d'rabanan. So so tzorech it's not that tzorech is, you know, a lashon to distinguish a din d'rabanan within dinei d'oraisa because the Rambam has the same lashon here by by haschala d'galus. So at least in this context, again, you'd have to, we'll mention one other tzorech in the Rambam, I don't know, you have to try to think or let the computer find for you where the other tzorechs are in in the Rambam. But but perhaps as follows. The Rambam is quoting the din, the Magen Avraham quotes the braisa in Arvei Pesachim that

אין לו בן אשתו שואלתו אין לו אשה שואלין זה את זה היה לבדו שואל עצמו.

So the din is that sippur yetzias Mitzrayim is supposed to be in a question-answer format. It's not just to be mesaper, but in question-answer format. And that's the omek of the fact that the Torah depicts the ben as asking, והיה כי ישאלך בנך. It's not stam, you know, you should be prepared for this eventuality that, you know, kids like to ask questions. So it could be that someday or Hakadosh Baruch Hu is saying, looking into a crystal ball, you know, it will be that they'll... no, והיה כי ישאלך בנך is is part of the din, is part of the sippur. It's supposed to be in question-answer format. For a moment let's just, I mean it is that way, and you don't have to give a hesber, we'll in a second and shortly we will, but for the moment it is that way that היה לבדו שואל עצמו. It's supposed to be in question-answer format. It's takeh that even though the various hanhagos that we have to provoke the ben to ask are obviously d'rabanans, akiras hashulchan and karpas and everything, they are all they are all d'rabanans, but what you're trying to achieve, there is a kiyum d'oraisa now. There is a kiyum d'oraisa in that in that if if one is successful through the akiras hashulchan, through the חוטפין מצה זה מזה, if one is successful in provoking, in triggering the question, so yeah, the tactics, the strategies were d'rabanan, but lema'aseh it's not something that you can sort of totally categorize as d'rabanan because the din that it should be derech sheila u'teshuva is poshut is is a din d'oraisa. Is a din d'oraisa. So hayos that the din is that it should be derech sheila u'teshuva, so then mimmela one should seek to elicit the question. One should seek to provoke. And elicit the question. And that there is a kiyum d'Oraisa to the to the various practices which are intended to try to elicit the question. So too, and that I think is clear. The next point I'm not sure if what would be if a person engages in sippur yetzias mitzrayim, but not מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח? Would you say the same lashon that the Rambam is about to quote from the Mishnah in Halacha Hey, that לא יצא ידי חובתו, which the Rambam quotes from Rabban Gamliel's כל שלא אמר שלשה דברים אלו בפסח? I don't know, maybe the contrast between Tzorech in Halacha Dalet and Rabban Gamliel's כל שלא אמר לא יצא ידי חובתו. Here too in Halacha Dalet, it's something you have to do but it's not meakev in it's not meakev. Itachen that if a person will engage in sippur yetzias mitzrayim without the tzurah of being מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח, that clearly it's deficient. Clearly he's missing something min hatorah. Clearly we would tell him to, you know, to go back and do it, but l'maiseh l'maiseh, if he didn't, I don't know, I don't think you would say that he was itachen you would not say that he was not yotzeh the mitzvah of the sippur benisim v'niflaos. And itachen questions like this. I once heard someone raise the following question. I was walking through a room once, someone was beginning a shiur. I heard the question, then I walked through the room, but I didn't hear the answer. So the question that the person raised was like this. In Halacha Alef, and again we know it from the Haggadah, the Rambam says וכל המרבה בדברים שאירעו שהיה הרי זה משובח, right? וכל המרבה בסיפור יציאת מצרים הרי זה משובח. Then in Halacha Dalet, the end of Halacha Dalet:

וכן מתחיל מודיע שעבדים היינו לפרעה במצרים וכל הרעה שגמלנו ומסיים בנסים ונפלאות שנעשו לנו בחירותנו ושידרוש מארמי אובד אבי עד שיגמור כל הפרשה וכל המוסיף ומרבה בדרוש פרשה זו הרי זה משובח.

Nacha-mah המרבה הרי זה משובח, the marbeh. So why does the Rambam say it twice? This is just part of sippur yetzias mitzrayim and we just said about sippur yetzias mitzrayim in general that המרבה הרי זה משובח. Why does the Rambam have המרבה הרי זה משובח a second time? So itachen that the pshat is as follows. Again, consistent with what we quoted from the Rambam the other day, that it's a yesod, not just in sippur yetzias mitzrayim, it's a yesod of Mikra Bikurim, the fact that the Torah says וזכרת כי עבד היית בארץ מצרים, that a person is supposed to remember ימי הרעה בימי הטובה. That's the, and l'chora that's the basis for the din and the chiyuv, the din of צריך להתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח. So itachen that there's mitzvas sippur. Mitzvas sippur certainly means... בצורה של מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח as it were a kiyum bifnei atzmo within mitzvah sippur. A kiyum bifnei atzmo within mitzvah sippur. And that's why it has its own harei zeh meshubach. וכל המרבה הרי זה משובח because וכל המרבה הרי זה משובח in mitzvah sippur and וכל המרבה הרי זה משובח in this, again, mitzvah sippur then triggers the din of מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח and and that has its own וכל המרבה הרי זה משובח. But that also would support that if the person wasn't מתחיל בגנות ומסיים בשבח, agam, again, there's something missing min hatorah. His his sippur is deficient min hatorah but but he's yotzei. But he's yotzei. So that's what the Rambam indicates with with the tzorech. Tzorech is again it's something which even deoraysa tzorech. It's not that the tzorech means that this is derabbanan in contrast to the to the previous of mitzvah which is deoraysa. No, this is also, this is also min hatorah. But min hatorah it it isn't meakev in in the in the sippur. In Halacha Gimmel there's a kiyum deoraysa in provoking the question because because there's a din that the format should be derech she'eilah uteshuvah. In Halacha Daled mitzvah sippur triggers a din that you should whenever you're being remembering yemei hatovah it triggers the din to be zocheh yemei hara. So that's min hatorah but on the other hand it's a din which is distinct from the from the etzem chiyuv sippur which is why in terms of sippur it's tzorech. The Rambam has again, I don't know where the other tzorechs are in Mishneh Torah and and not davka that they all have to fit this pattern. It's not a perach if they don't. But in Hilchos Tefilla the Rambam has as follows in Perek Ches:

תפילת הציבור נשמעת תמיד. ואפילו היו בהן חטאים. עם חטאים יתמו חטאים מן הארץ

the the את מחטות החטאים האלה בנפשותם it means the people.

ואפילו היו בהן חטאים אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מואס בתפילתן של רבים. לפיכך צריך אדם לשתף עצמו עם הציבור ולא יתפלל יחידי כל זמן שיכול להתפלל בציבור.

So the Rambam didn't mention anything in Perek Alef Halachas Alef or Gimmel where he defines the deoraysa of tefilla. He didn't say anything that that the deoraysa of tefilla requires, demands, that that a person be משתף עצמו עם הציבור and and davening betzibbur. Meeidach gisa, היות תפילת הציבור נשמעת תמיד, clearly clearly to daven betzibbur is is again not just something which miderabbanan is is a good thing to do. It clearly is a kiyum deoraysa. The tefilla is a is a different cheftza shel tefilla when a person davens im hatzibbur as opposed to to davening beyechidus. So here too the tzorech again is something which isn't meakev. If a person davens beyechidus avaday he's yotzei be it the deoraysa of tefilla once a day, be it the derabbanan of Shacharis Mincha Maariv. But meeidach gisa, meeidach gisa, it is a kiyum again if in the once a day it's a kiyum even in the deoraysa. And and there's something deficient. Again not just the kiyum if you do it it enhances and if you don't do it no. There's something deficient if a person doesn't do it and and that's what the mashmaus of tzorech is.