Transcript

מצות עשה של תורה לספר בנסים ונפלאות שנעשו לאבותינו במצרים בליל חמישה עשר בניסן שנאמר זכור את היום הזה אשר יצאתם ממצרים כמו שנאמר זכור את יום השבת. ומנין שבליל חמישה עשר תלמוד לומר והגדת לבנך ביום ההוא לאמר בעבור זה בשעה שיש מצה ומרור מונחים לפניך. ואף על פי שאין לו בן אפילו חכמים גדולים חייבים לספר ביציאת מצרים וכל המאריך בדברים שעירעו ושהיו הרי זה משובח.

The Rambam starts as a chiddush with demur and say that there's no chiddush per se, but the first point here which is just so vital to recognize is that Sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim according to the Rambam is not what we think it is. It's not to tell the story of the Exodus. That's not what Sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim is. It's the saper benissim veniflaot. It's the focus on the nissim veniflaot. Everything else and everything else is context, is perspective, is backdrop, but the definition of the mitzvah is saper benissim veniflaot. Why would the Rambam refuse any credit for a chiddush? The Rambam says it's pesukim bachumash at the end of Parshas Bo:

והיה כי ישאלך בנך מחר לאמר מה זאת ואמרת אליו בחוזק יד הוציאנו ה' ממצרים מבית עבדים.

So what does chozek yad represent? I'd say literally a strength. So strength it means a let's say I guess a mashal. Under normal circumstances so you don't see any display of strength. When things happen that generally don't happen, can't happen, so then that's a display of strength. So the Peshat is that chozek yad is an anthropomorphism for miracles. And lechora that's reinforced that understanding of what the anthropomorphism of chozek yad represents is reinforced by the next pasuk:

ויהי כי הקשה פרעה לשלחנו ויהרג ה' כל בכור בארץ מצרים מבכור אדם ועד בכור בהמה.

We zero in on Makat Bechorot. If there's any doubt about it so then that would be dispelled in Parshas Va'etchanan:

כי ישאלך בנך מחר לאמר מה העדת והחקים והמשפטים אשר צוה ה' אלהינו אתכם ואמרת לבנך עבדים היינו לפרעה במצרים ויוציאנו ה' ממצרים ביד חזקה ויתן ה' אותת ומופתים גדולים ורעים במצרים בפרעה ובכל ביתו לעינינו.

So the ben asks about mah zot or mah ha'edot and we tell him about otot umofsim. That's nissim veniflaot. It's not the story, the storyline of Yetziat Mitzrayim keshe'hi atzmah is not what it's about. It's about the sippur nissim veniflaot. As obvious and as basic as this is, it also creates certain questions, it also generates certain questions. So first of all, if you take a look, maybe in the Hagahos Maimoniyos, it's at the end of Hilchos Chametz U-Matzah underneath the Os Aleph on the Rambam's Haggadah in Hagahos Maimoniyos. On the left hand side of the page you see the Tanya Be-Tosefta. Tanya Be-Tosefta, Be-Parshas De-Matzosa,

חייב אדם לעסוק בהלכות פסח אפילו בינו לבין עצמו בינו לבין אשתו בינו לבין תלמידו מעשה ברבן גמליאל וחכמים שהיו עוסקים בהלכות פסח כל הלילה עד כרוס הגבר.

Sure. Now, I think the Rosh quotes this Tosefta also, it's quoted in Shulchan Aruch and Halacha that basically the Talmud Torah of Masechet Pesachim is a part of the Mitzvas Sippur of Yetzias Mitzrayim. Okay, so the Rambam completely passed on like the Tosefta. Tosefta, it's not quoted in Shas, one is not Mechuyav to Pasken like... and L'maiseh when the Rambam tells us what Sippur Yetzias Mitzrayim is, again, Shulchan Aruch says like this, so what I think of the Rambam is the maiseh Shulchan Aruch follows the Rosh and does quote this, and does quote this Tosefta. You don't really see in the Rambam how this enters into his definition of Sippur Yetzias Mitzrayim. But Ela Mah, the Sheilah is like this, the Sheilah is, I mean, the Rambam also has the Chazal in the Haggadah, חכם מה הוא אומר. It's on the same page,

חכם מה הוא אומר מה העדות והחוקים והמשפטים אשר ציווה השם אלוקינו אתכם אף אתה אמור לו כהלכות פסח אין מפטירים אחר הפסח אפיקומן.

So how do you understand this? How does... so how is אין מפטירים אחר הפסח אפיקומן, how does that enter into the purview of Mitzvas Sippur if the definition of Mitzvas Sippur is the sippur of Nissim Veniflaos? Okay, so it's obviously, if you have the Vilna Gaon's Girsa, the Kashya is even stronger, and the Gaon's Girsa is

אף אתה אמור לו כהלכות פסח עד אין מפטירים אחר הפסח אפיקומן,

means you read Masechet Pesachim. The Gaon's Shitta is you don't only tell him the Haggadah, you teach him all of Pesachim, Haggadah is a big part. Okay. The Rambam doesn't have ad. Even so, אין מפטירים אחר הפסח אפיקומן, what's... how is that relevant, and more than relevant, the kashya says that it's shayach to the sippur. You have the Rambam Perek Ches Halacha Tes. V'Achar Kach

נמשך בסעודה ואוכל כל מה שהוא רוצה לאכול ושותה כל מה שהוא רוצה לשתות ובאחרונה אוכל מבשר הפסח אפילו כזית ואינו טועם אחריו כלל ובזמן הזה אוכל כזית mצה ואינו טועם אחריה כלום כדי שיהיה הפסק סעודתו וטעם בשר הפסח או המצה בפיו שאכילתם היא המצווה.

So the Mishna says אין מפטירים אחר הפסח אפיקומן. It's a Machlokes Amora'im what Afikoman means. The view that we accept B'halacha is that you can't bring out dessert after the Pesach. After the Pesach, אין מפטירים אחר הפסח אפיקומן, right? After the Pesach you can't bring out the... you can't bring out dessert. The Pesach is the last thing to eat. That's the understanding of the Mishna that we accept B'halacha. So what is this din based on? So Tosafos says the din is based on that since the Pesach is supposed to be ne'echal al hasova, so to ensure that it's ne'echal al hasova, so if if you anticipate if you have the possibility of of dessert after the Korban Pesach, so then you're going to be saving appetite for for dessert as as well. Who's going to forgo the the ice cream? So lemaisa so comes along the din and says no, you should know that there isn't going to be anything to eat after the Korban Pesach, so you might as well the Korban Pesach might as well be the last thing to eat, so you can you can eat it al hasova. But that's clearly not how the Rambam is presenting the din of אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן. The Rambam is saying because by having the Korban Pesach or the matzah which lefi peshuto it's a machlokes in the Rishonim between the Rosh on on the one hand, the Rashba on the other hand, whether the matzah afikoman is זכר למצה הנאכלת עם הפסח or whether it's zecher lepesach. The pshat in the Rambam is like the Rosh, is like the second opinion that our matzah afikoman is zecher to the Pesach afikoman. So the din of אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן is because in so doing we accentuate the fact that achilasam hi hamitzva. achilasam hi hamitzva. Why would it be achilasam hi hamitzva? Bizman Hamikdash, so Korban Pesach was a mitzvah d'Oraisa but matzah was also a mitzvah d'Oraisa uba'erev tochlu matzos is today ladoros a mitzvah d'Oraisa. Okay, maror wasn't an independent mitzvah d'Oraisa according to the Rambam as Bizman Hamikdash according to us everyone would agree, but according to the Rambam it wasn't. So so what's the achilasam hi hamitzva? What do you mean it's the mitzvah? How is it the mitzvah? Matzah is the same is the same mitzvah d'Oraisa Bizman Hamikdash, the same uba'erev tochlu matzos that we have bazman hazeh, so they had Bizman Hamikdash. So it's also achilasam achilasam hi hamitzva. If you take a look the the Rambam when he talks about ta'amei hamitzvos, so the Rambam distinguishes between Korban Pesach and matzah maror. Agav the pshita notwithstanding that maror isn't an independent mitzvah, but the Rambam distinguishes between Pesach and matzah maror. The ta'am of the mitzvah of the matzah and maror is to remember the shibbud. And the Pesach

ואמרתם זבח פסח הוא לה' אשר פסח על בתי בני ישראל במצרים בנגפו את מצרים.

And the Korban Pesach is zecher lemakkas bechoros, is zecher zecher to the geula. So it's like this, it's like this. Avada avada Bizman Hamikdash matzah was also a mitzvah d'Oraisa, but if you want to know in terms of the relationship to mitzvas sippur, if you want to know in terms of the interconnectedness of the mitzvas achila of the evening and the mitzvas sippur, you know which one is hamitzva? You know which one is achilasam hi hamitzva? It's the Korban Pesach because it's the Korban Pesach which represents the ness and

ואמרתם זבח פסח הוא לה' אשר פסח על בתי בני ישראל במצרים בנגפו את מצרים.

The way we accomplish that is by afikoman. Since hachivusa, the mitzva, comes the ben chacham and asks, מה העדות והחוקים והמשפטים אשר ציווה השם אלוקינו אתכם? So he says that according to the Rambam, again, we're not talking about Hilchos Chametz U’matzah, specifically, according to the Rambam in Talmud Torah, keshehua atzmo. So the machlokes is the Rambam and Tosafos about bittul chametz, so mistama according to the Shulchan Aruch, that we can chazzar out that sefer and the kiyum in mitzvas sippur, but not like the Rambam. So what are you telling the ben chacham? Afikoman. This din, this din, אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן. So that, that din of achilas pesach is exactly what the whole sippur is about. And that's why you takeh tell him that din. Maybe in halacha beis in perek tes, the Rambam says

מצווה להודיע לבנים ואפילו לא שאלו שנאמר והגדת לבנך ופי דעתו של בן אביו מלמדו.

Keitzad?

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. ואם היה הבן גדול וחכם מודיעו מה שאירע לנו במצרים בניסים שנעשו לנו על ידי משה רבינו הכל לפי דעתו של בן.

Okay, so two questions. One in the reisha and one in the seifa. I don't know if either of the answers is fully, fully satisfactory. The peleh in the reisha is that there's no mention of nissim veniflaos for the katan o tipesh. Okay, so the obvious comeback to that is the katan o tipesh, again, either katan by dint of his age, so he's not sufficiently intellectually mature, or the tipesh by dint of his limited capacity, the whole thing about going into nissim veniflaos. Okay, so but wouldn't you have thought? And let's say you have a katan אינו יכול לאכול כזית of achilas pesach? So what do you do? You're pattur? There's no mitzvas chinuch? If a katan doesn't have the capacity for the mitzva, so you wait. And if he never has the capacity, then he never has the capacity. So if the whole mitzva is the sippur nissim veniflaos and you have a ben who is not yet, or maybe never will be, capable of processing that, okay, so what are you going to do? Under the sefer hamitzvos, you can't be m’kayem the mitzvas sippur vis-a-vis this ben. The kasha in the seifa is: Why, when the Rambam describes what the hiyuv is to the ben chacham, how come he doesn't mention אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן? L’maisa, what we tell the ben chacham, we do link it, we do link the sippur nissim veniflaos and tell him, and realize that that's what achilas pesach is all about. So why isn't there any indication that here in halacha beis, when the Rambam is, so in terms of the second halacha when we're talking about the various differences between the presentation of the halacha. So in terms of the second halacha you're talking as far as if there's any difference between the presentation of Halacha Beis and the way the Ba'al HaTurim or the Rambam cites has it, is that in Halacha Beis you see a chiddush that the chiyuv of the father to take the initiative is not only with an eino yodeia lishol. The chiyuv to take the initiative you can have a ben sh'hu chacham, but if for whatever reason the ben chacham doesn't ask, the father also has the chiyuv to take the initiative. The chiyuv to take the initiative is not only with an eino yodeia lishol. If the chacham doesn't ask, so then the father has the chiyuv to take the initiative with the chacham also. Alright. Yitachen and I don't know, ayn li ra'ayah, but yitachen as follows. The way the Torah in Parshas Va'eschanan and the way the Ba'al HaHaggadah are describing the exchange between the father and the ben chacham, so what, how does the exchange begin? So the chacham asks מה העדות והחוקים והמשפטים אשר צוה ה' אלקינו אתכם, which pshitus means in particular what's pshat in what we're doing at the Seder? So then yitachen avada avada when, when the ben does initiate and the ben does ask the question, avada avada you have to tailor the sippur to answer the question. You can't, he asks a question Ma ha'eidos and then you'll be a politician, you'll give a whole drasha, you'll talk for two hours and then a few minutes later he'll realize you never answered his question. His question was מה העדות והחוקים והמשפטים and you've got to tell him, you've got to tell him about the makkas bechoros and you've got to tell him about the nisim betoch nisim of makkas bechoros and vechulu vechulu. And listen I want to know what's pshat with the Korban Pesach and you didn't tell me. So when he asks, avada avada you have to answer the question. The question is kinyan and you have to. So the question is quite what does the Rambam think, again there's no stirah as to whether what we're saying is correct. Let's say the ben chacham does not initiate and the sippur that the father engages in with the ben chacham is purely from the father's initiative. So is there a chiyuv to link up to, to link up to the achilas haPesach and the אין מפטירין אחר הפסח אפיקומן? If you would say no, so then that would explain this question. Aino yodeia. One of the questions we had in the reisha, how can you engage in sippur with a child that isn't capable of understanding the mussar of the miracle, of the nisim venifla'os? Let's see. This has to be formulated very precisely.

הנשמע כדבר הגדול הזה או הנשמע כמהו. הניסה אלהים לבוא לקחת לו גוי מקרב גוי במסות באותות ובמופתים ובמלחמה וביד חזקה ובזרוע נטויה ובמוראים גדלים ככל אשר עשה לכם השם אלהיכם במצרים לעיניך. אתה הראת לדעת כי השם הוא האלהים אין עוד מלבדו.

So in this parsha the Rambam has this idea also that that is again just very compellingly emerges from the psukim. That sippur nissim venifla'ot that there is no kiyum if it doesn't point to and highlight yesodot ha-emunah. If the sippur nissim venifla'ot doesn't lead to, doesn't induce hakara כי השם הוא האלקים אין עוד מלבדו and I don't know, one walks away from the seder rachmana litzlan thinking that Mitzrayim was the all-time all-time, you know, magic show of all time and what's the name of the guy who used to get out of the handcuffs whenever they tied him up? What was his name? Yeah, Houdini. It was mamash it even topped the Harry Houdini. If that's... so a person can detail the chamishim makkot on the yam, the eser makkot, v'chamishim u-matayim she-malku, if it doesn't induce hakara כי השם הוא האלקים אין עוד מלבדו, that's not the mitzvah of sippur. Again, and this is not... see this is the crucial point, this is not again the ta'amei mitzvah, this is the gufa shel mitzvah. The gufa shel mitzvah is the hakara of Hashem hu ha-Elokim which emerges from the way Hakadosh Baruch Hu took us out of Mitzrayim. Itachen that allows for the fact, okay, so if you're talking to an adult, to an adult, unless you tell him about how the process was supernatural, so it doesn't lead into Ata horeta lada'at. For the בן קטן שאינו יודע לשאול, itachen

הקדוש ברוך הוא פדה אותנו. פדה אותנו הקדוש ברוך הוא ויוציאנו לחירות.

So on his level, you are doing the same thing that you're doing with the ben chacham. The ben chacham because the sippur nissim venifla'ot is really code word for יד השם ביציאתנו ממצרים. That's what nissim... so for an adult, if you don't see the nissim venifla'ot, so okay, so the whole thing was something natural, so what's... מה קמא דאנשא זה? You have to highlight the otot u-moftim. But really, the real underlying definition, not the ta'amei mitzvah, the definition of the gufa shel mitzvah is again the יד השם ביציאתנו ממצרים so that mitzvah sippur, again as in those two psukim in Va-etchanan, naturally induces the hakara Ata horeta lada'at. So if that's the case, so then the בן קטן שאינו יודע לשאול is also ra-uy to hear, to be told sippur yetziat mitzrayim on his level. The Rambam quotes this in the Haggadah as well, it's in the Gemara as well, אם לא אשתו שאלה אם לא אשה שאלה zeh vezeh הוא עצמו שואל לעצמו but the format of Sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim is derech sheila uteshuva. Okay, so we have a pshat so that's והיה כי ישאלך בנך. But the Torah again on more than one occasion, twice the Torah has והיה כי ישאלך בנך to hint to to to this bin how how derech agadah so it tachen one aspect of what this represents. What is question? What does question represent? So all little kids if if you have younger siblings, I might be that that person that remembers back at that stage, but if you have younger siblings, you have nieces and nephews, so you've seen it with them. So kids at a certain stage, I don't know, age three, four, five, or whatever, everything is why. Everything is why, everything is why, why, why, why. So what does that reflect? So what it reflects is, and the answers as we rather humbly and embarrassingly discover, we don't really know the answer to about ninety-nine percent of what these three-year-olds are asking us and the face-saving gestures don't usually work because the kid picks up on it and says, "But why? That still doesn't make any sense." So how come? How come the the three-year-old is why, why, why and we just at the point that we assume we know the answer mostly we don't know the answer most of the time? So that is because we take it for granted and the child doesn't take it for granted. So questioning represents a sensitivity, a sensitivity not to take things for granted, not to ignore things, not not to be numb and apathetic towards what's happening. What what the Torah here is is hinting at is even Sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim as as overwhelming as nissim veniflaos are, lemaise lemaise he lacks that sensitivity which is represented and embodied in the questioning in asking what is this ma m'hai something different. Unless a person has that sensitivity so he's not going to be able to recognize the the Sippur and he's certainly not going to be able to internalize all all the the emunah and the yesodos ha'emunah which which are are contained there והיה כי ישאלך בנך.