The Obligation to Experience the Redemption from Egypt At the Seder
Each year at the seder every Jewish is obligated to recount the story of how G-d brought the Jewish people out of Egypt “with a strong hand and an outreached arm” performing great miracles and wonders on their behalf. This mitzvah of“seepore yitzeyat mitzrayim” is required of all Jewish adults, men and women. It is fulfilled in the telling or in the listening to the story as expressed in the Haggadah. It states clearly in the Mishnah Torah of the Rambam and the Haggadah itself, that our greatest scholars are required to perform this mitzvah, even when scholars are reciting it to each other or when an individual scholar is alone and recites it to himself. The Haggadah states: “Even if we were all men of wisdom, understanding, experience, and knowledge of the Torah, it would still be an obligation upon us to tell about the Exodus from Egypt. The more one tells about the Exodus, the more he is praiseworthy.”
This statement in the Haggadah is followed by a description of the great Torah Sages of the Mishna (Tannaim) who were performing a seder among themselves in Bnei Brak. Maimonides in his great work states that even “a great scholar” is obligated in the mitzvah of recounting the redemption at the seder. The Rambam states: “Even great men of wisdom (chachamim gedolim) are obligated to recount the redemption from Egypt and all who increase their recounting of what occurred they are praiseworthy.”
This specific detail of the Rambam describing the requirement that even “great scholars” are required to perform the mitzvah of recounting the redemption at the seder, is, it seems to me, a response to an unstated question. “Why is a scholar, who is thoroughly versed in the details of the story of the redemption from Egypt, required to recount it to other scholars who also know it very well, or to himself?” One could ask, “what purpose does it serve for such individuals to review a story they know so well?”
This idea (that perhaps you might think no purpose is to be served for the scholar to recount the Exodus) seems at first to me to be a curious one, requiring investigation. Torah scholars never complete their task of study. The Torah is “as deep as the sea” and “everything is contained within it”. So why might one think that the scholar has completely exhausted the area of the redemption from Egypt any more than a scholar would be completely done with a parsha in the Chumash or a tractate of the Talmud? These are endless pursuits as the finite human mind attempts to understand the Divine revelations of the Torah! How could one consider that even the greatest scholar is done with understanding the redemption of the Jewish people from Egypt?!
The Rav (Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, zt”l) analyzes the fact that the Rambam uses the term “great scholars” (chachamim gedolim) instead of the Haggadah’s term, “scholars” (“chachamim”) when describing the obligation to recount the redemption. The Rav states:
The Rambam in the 7th chapter of the Laws of Chometz and Matzah adds to the words of the Haggadah and writes, “even great scholars are obligated to recount into the redemption from Egypt.” This is the Rambam explaining the intent of the Haggadah that not only is a scholar obligated in recounting the redemption from Egypt, but also a great scholar is obligated. It seems that the Rambam learns this from the description (in the event that follows) about Rabbi Eliezer, that comes immediately after this statement to bring a support for the statement “even if we were all men of wisdom and understanding we would be obligated in recounting the redemption from Egypt, since even the Tannaim (great scholars of the Mishna) recounting the redemption from Egypt.
The Rambam’s clarification of the phrase “scholars” to include “great scholars” is illuminating. It makes clear that there is no level of scholarship or wisdom that would exempt a person from the obligation to recount the redemption from Egypt at the seder. The Rav explains this specifically in his commentary on the Haggadah’s statement: “It is an obligation upon us to recount into the redemption from Egypt”. The Rav focuses in on the unusual phrase here “into the redemption from Egypt (“ beeyitziat mitzrayim”). He states:
It would seem that the Haggadah should have written “it is an obligation upon us to recount the redemption from Egypt” (et yitziat mitzrayim”). But since the Haggadah states “beeyitziat mitzrayim” we must reflect on this particular language. We can explain this particular choice of words (“nusach”). It seems that the distinction between the two phrases (“et yitziat mitzrayim” versus “beyitziat mitzrayim”) is as follows: to recount something means to describe the thing and after you have described it and know it, there is no more to recount. This is not the case with “beyitziat mitzrayim” In this case the explanation of the use of the phrase is to delve deeply into it and to clarify its foundations and not merely to recount the event. This is the meaning of the Haggadah when it states ‘even if we were all men of wisdom and understanding and knowledgeable in the Torah” – even if we knew all the facts of the event of the redemption we have to delve deeply into the area.”
The Rav’s explanation, of course, makes perfect sense. The Torah scholar is not simply supposed to recount the story in its narrative form (i.e. –the events that occurred) but must continually plum the depths of the underlying legal and philosophical principles that are associated with the events and laws of the redemption from Egypt. Once this is included as part of the mitzvah of “telling the story of the redemption from Egypt” it is clear to us that no scholar can ever complete the task. But I would ask the following: Of course this is so! Why might we have thought that the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzyaim” (recounting the redemption from Egypt) would be limited to the telling of the series of events that occurred and no more? What about this mitzvah of “seepore” leaves us open to this possible interpretation? Why do we even require the clarification of the Haggadah and in the halachic sources that in-depth analysis of the redemption is part of the mitzvah?
This “Seepore” Different than Other Storytelling
Perhaps we can explain why it is necessary for the Haggadah, the Rambam and the Rav to clarify for us that the mitzvah of recounting the redemption includes in-depth study. First of all, the words “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” is simply translated to “tell the story of the redemption from Egypt”. It is not a mitzvah of Talmud Torah (learning Torah). Telling the story of an event does not usually include an analysis of the underlying concepts beneath the story. If , for example, I describe a hurricane that hit a particular town and destroyed some buildings and uprooted trees, I don’t usually include a discussion of meteorology and how hurricanes are formed. This is not “the telling of the story” of what happened. It is true that many news stories do go into background to explain the story, but these are two separate parts and I could certainly assume that the fulfillment of the mitzvah of “seepore” would be confined to the description of events and would not include the background and analysis. If this is so, then I can see why I would have thought that “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” might be limited to the description of events and, if this is the case, why the great scholars might be exempt. The basic events of the story of the redemption are completely known to them. To recount the events alone would add nothing to their knowledge. So the Haggadah and the halachah comes to tell us that the analysis and background ARE included in the mitzvah of “seepore” and therefore, of course the scholars (even the greatest) scholars can benefit from further delving into the subject and are, therefore, obligated in this mitzvah. It requires explanation why it states in the Haggadah that one is to “recount into the redemption from Egypt” (“beyitziat mitzrayim”) whereas one would think the Haggadah should state to “recount on the redemption from Egypt” (“al yitziat mitzrayim”). It seems that the use of the phrase “beyitziat mitzrayim” is to convey to us that the form and character of the recounting is to be done such that we enter with all our strength into the story and the mitzvah is to tell all the details with full emotion until it seems on account of this telling that one feels as if the he went out of mitzrayim. This is the recounting “into the redemption from Egypt” (“seepore beyitziat mitzrayim”) specifically, to be completely immersed is the body of the story, since this recounting is a “kiyam b’lav” – a fulfillment of the heart- and one is obligated to be completely absorbed into the story.”
But we still have not explained:
1) Why it is that “seepore” ,in the case of the Haggadah, departs from its usual structure and includes background, analysis and studying the underlying principals of the story?
2) If this inclusion of in-depth analysis is part of the mitzvah of recounting the story of the redemption from Egypt, why was the mitzvah called “seepore” and not “limud yitziat mitzrayim” (learning about the redemption from Egypt”?
3) If the mitzvah includes the delving into the depths of study of the redemption and the mitzvoth related to it, why is it that the mitzvah is performed in its optimal way when the facts of the “miracles and wonders” are told to a child who does not yet know the story? If the essence of this mitzvah is the learning dimensio, then it seems to me that the scholar’s “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” should be the optimal way to carry out the mitzvah and not merely the default case which you might not think is even required!
Let’s address these questions one at a time. First – “Why is it that “seepore” includes the in depth analysis?” The usual purpose of “seepore” – the telling of a story - is to relate to someone the external aspects of the event. As the journalists say, the “who, what, where, why, when and how” are the basis of reporting any story. This constitutes the usual boundaries of “seepore”. But the “seepore” of the redemption of the Jewish people from Egypt serves a different purpose from that of the usual story. The fulfillment or “kiym” of the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” is not simply to assure that the reader or listener is informed of an event that occurred in the past. Instead the reader of the Haggadah and those listening are supposed to experience the redemption from Egypt themselves. The Rav explains this in analyzing once again the term “seepore beyitziat mitzrayim” – “to tell the story in the redemption from Egypt.” He focuses again on the unusual use of the term “beyitziat” (in the redemption) instead of “et yitziat” (about the redemption). The Rav states:
We can understand from the Rav’s explanation that the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” is not simply a case of being informed about something that happened to others. At the seder the person is supposed to re-experience the event of the Exodus himself or herself- to feel it deeply as if it is happening to him or her right at that moment. There is an obligation, it seems, to call upon one’s imagination to relive the actual redemption in all of its glory.
There are other indications in the Haggadh of this obligation to actually experience the redemption from Egypt in the fulfillment of the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim.” It states in the Haggadah:
In every generation one is obligated to look upon himself as if he personally had gone forth out of Egypt as it says: “And you shall relate to your child on that day, saying: “It is because of this that H’ acted for me when I came forth out of Egypt” (Shemot 13:8). Not only our father did the Holy One, Blessed be He, redeem but us, too, He redeemed together with them, as it says: “And He brought us out from there that He might bring us home to give to us the land which He had sworn to our fathers” (Devarim 6:23)
What does the Haggadah really mean to say when it states that “one is obligated to look upon himself as if (“leyrote et atzmo”) as if he personally had gone forth out of Egypt? You and I were not actually brought out of Egypt with Moshe and Aaron since we had not yet come into existence! Why am I then obligated to look at myself as if I was? It is certainly true that I have benefited from the redemption. In a similar way I would be “saved” if my mother was saved by a lifeguard from drowning when she was a child. The lifeguard did not “save me”. But without the lifeguard’s actions, I would not be alive today. Is this all that is meant by the Haggadah: that I should realize that I owe my current situation of freedom to the redemption from Egypt? If so why does the Haggadah state “to look upon himself as if he personally had gone forth out of Egypt” instead of stating “as if he was redeemed from Egypt.” The Haggadah requires that I look at myself not only as being redeemed through the Exodus but that I was actually “brought forth out of Egypt”! It does seem necessary to actually imagine oneself as going through the experience of the actual redemption. Why is this experiencing of the redemption necessary?
Jew’s Relationship to G… Requires Experiencing the Redemption From Egypt
Perhaps we can explain this requirement in the following manner: The act of redemption from Egypt was not only an historical event that created the Jewish nation at a point in time. The redemption from Egypt is an event that reveals the full relationship of G-d to each Jew. This revelation and the miracles and wonders were not simply to bring the Jews out of slavery to embark on a new path- it was to establish a new level of intimacy in the relationship between G-d and man. Until the redemption, the Creator had not revealed the full expression of his power, his concern for the Jewish people nor his relationship to the affairs of mankind. It is the experiencing of the redemption that fully and revealed G-d to man. The freeing of the Jews from slavery was a historical necessity at that moment for the Jewish people. But more than this, the redemption was G-d revealing of himself to man, so that man could fully embrace their relationship. The Jew is destined and required to have this full relationship with G-d. It is for this reason that every Jew must actually experience the redemption.
But there is a problem. We weren’t all present in Egypt to experience the miracles and wonders and the destruction of the mitzrim at the Yam Soof (Sea of Reeds). So how can we fully encounter G-d? How can we establish this full relationship with our Creator?
A human mind has a unique ability. It can imagine. We must, therefore, deeply imagine ourselves as living through the redemption from Egypt. We need to focus our energies on, not only studying and recounting the details of the miracles and wonders of the redemption, but on imagining ourselves living through these events. In this way we too, to the extent of our abilities to re-imagine it, can also “come forth from Egypt” and establish our fullest relationship with G-d.
The fulfillment of this requirement experiencing the redemption through the process of “seepore” at the seder can be seen as a uniting principal which explains a number of elements of the halachic structure of the Pesach seder.
1) The obligations of pursuing in depth study of the redemption, which the Rav explains as the reason that even the greatest scholar is obligated in the mitzah of “seepore”. From the perspective of reliving the redemption at the seder, this in-depth study can take on a new meaning. We can unite the concepts of “seepore” and Talmud torah in this way: The in-depth study and understanding of an area is a path towards the imagining of the experience. When a scholar studies an area lightly, he learns the facts about the subject and some interesting detail. But an in-depth study of the area allows for a deeper, more personal relationship with an event. The great scholar of any area can reach a point of intimacy with the information where the subject “comes alive” and is re-experienced by him or her. We can understand, in this way, how the in-depth limud of the redemption from Egypt can effectively lead a person to the re-experiencing of the redemption, which we are posing now as a goal of the “seepore”. The study here is not a purely intellectual pursuit, but instead is done to accomplish to “fulfillment of the heart” (“kiyam b’lave”) of personally experiencing the redemption from Egypt. So it now becomes clear why the in-depth learning of the foundations, laws and events of the redemption are part of the mitzvah of seepore. This in-depth learning is an effective method of transforming the seepore into the re-experiencing of the redemption.
2) The eating of the matzah and marror - The statement of “In every generation one is obligated to look upon himself as if he personally went forth from Egypt” is stated in the Haggadah immediately after the fulfillment of the mitzvot of eating the matzah and eating the bitter herb (marror). The eating of these foods is truly an unusual mitzvah. Why do we need to eat matzah to remember the bread of affliction and why do we need to eat marror to recall the bitterness of our enslavement in Egypt? The inclusion of the senses of sight, taste and smell in the “seepore” serves to help transform the recounting of the redemption from the purely abstract, reflective realm and transform it into an aid to the imagination in helping us to relive the redemption experience. It brings our senses and feelings into the retelling of the story and creates something of a re-enactment. Immediately after these mitzvot and the eating of the “sandwich” (koraych) we are enjoined to envision ourselves as personally being redeemed from Egypt. These eating mitzvot assist us in this process.
3) The drinking of the 4 cups of wine – The drinking of four cups of wine is an obligation in “sepore.” It is considered to be a sign of our freedom (“chayros”). But why does the expression of freedom take the form of 4 cups of wine specifically? Perhaps an important benefit of this fairly large amount of wine at the seder is that alcohol assists a person in freeing their imaginative faculty and dulls the dividing point between rationality and imagination to some extent. The mild intoxication experienced at the seder can also serve as an aid in freeing the imagination and assisting the person in imagining him or herself as actually participating in the redemption from Egypt on the night of the seder. One does not usually drink wine while learning. Wine, especially 4 cups of wine, is not conducive to a usual form of in-depth learning. However, when we place as a purpose for the “sepore” the stimulation of a person’s ability to imagine him or herself as being taken out of Egypt that night, the wine can be a definite aid in this process. The “sepore” is certainly a form of learning. But it is a specific type of learning in which one must partake in bold imaginative mental activity that has an almost dreamlike quality, in order to re-experiencing the redemption. For this task, 4 cups of wine are of significant help.
4) The involvement of the children – We have not yet discussed the central role of children in the seder. There is a specific directive in the Torah of telling the story over to your children (“haggaditah luvenchah”). What is the special place of the child in this mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim”?
If we maintain our focus on the obligation to re-experience the redemption, we can easily see how children play a major role. Children have the most active imagination, as we see in their games and play. They have little trouble imagining themselves in different roles they read about or create in their fantasies. As their rational factuality and reality testing is still weak, their imagination is less encumbered and is easily capable of dominating their thoughts. Children are therefore the ideal candidates to re-experience the redemption on the seder night. For them it is a much easier task to place themselves back in Egypt, viewing and hearing the miracles and experiencing the joy and exhilaration of the redemption. We, as their parents, must do all we can to draw them into the “sepore” and assist them in living the experience of redemption. Perhaps in focusing on our children on the experiencing of the redemption it also assists us as adults in stimulating our imagination, bringing it to the fore in our own attempt to feel and experience the redemption from Egypt.
I believe we have addressed the three original questions:
1) “Seepore” in this case includes in-depth analysis because this analysis helps us to re-experience the redemption.
2) The mitzvah is not called “limud yitziat mitzrayim” even though it includes in depth learning because the in-depth learning in this particular case is for the sake of experiencing the redemption, experiencing the “seepore”.
3) Children are the optimal recipient of the “seepore” due to their most active imagination and their ability to relive the redemption on the night of the seder.
This idea (that perhaps you might think no purpose is to be served for the scholar to recount the Exodus) seems at first to me to be a curious one, requiring investigation. Torah scholars never complete their task of study. The Torah is “as deep as the sea” and “everything is contained within it”. So why might one think that the scholar has completely exhausted the area of the redemption from Egypt any more than a scholar would be completely done with a parsha in the Chumash or a tractate of the Talmud? These are endless pursuits as the finite human mind attempts to understand the Divine revelations of the Torah! How could one consider that even the greatest scholar is done with understanding the redemption of the Jewish people from Egypt?!
The Rav (Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, zt”l) analyzes the fact that the Rambam uses the term “great scholars” (chachamim gedolim) instead of the Haggadah’s term, “scholars” (“chachamim”) when describing the obligation to recount the redemption. The Rav states:
The Rambam in the 7th chapter of the Laws of Chometz and Matzah adds to the words of the Haggadah and writes, “even great scholars are obligated to recount into the redemption from Egypt.” This is the Rambam explaining the intent of the Haggadah that not only is a scholar obligated in recounting the redemption from Egypt, but also a great scholar is obligated. It seems that the Rambam learns this from the description (in the event that follows) about Rabbi Eliezer, that comes immediately after this statement to bring a support for the statement “even if we were all men of wisdom and understanding we would be obligated in recounting the redemption from Egypt, since even the Tannaim (great scholars of the Mishna) recounting the redemption from Egypt.
The Rambam’s clarification of the phrase “scholars” to include “great scholars” is illuminating. It makes clear that there is no level of scholarship or wisdom that would exempt a person from the obligation to recount the redemption from Egypt at the seder. The Rav explains this specifically in his commentary on the Haggadah’s statement: “It is an obligation upon us to recount into the redemption from Egypt”. The Rav focuses in on the unusual phrase here “into the redemption from Egypt (“ beeyitziat mitzrayim”). He states:
It would seem that the Haggadah should have written “it is an obligation upon us to recount the redemption from Egypt” (et yitziat mitzrayim”). But since the Haggadah states “beeyitziat mitzrayim” we must reflect on this particular language. We can explain this particular choice of words (“nusach”). It seems that the distinction between the two phrases (“et yitziat mitzrayim” versus “beyitziat mitzrayim”) is as follows: to recount something means to describe the thing and after you have described it and know it, there is no more to recount. This is not the case with “beyitziat mitzrayim” In this case the explanation of the use of the phrase is to delve deeply into it and to clarify its foundations and not merely to recount the event. This is the meaning of the Haggadah when it states ‘even if we were all men of wisdom and understanding and knowledgeable in the Torah” – even if we knew all the facts of the event of the redemption we have to delve deeply into the area.”
The Rav’s explanation, of course, makes perfect sense. The Torah scholar is not simply supposed to recount the story in its narrative form (i.e. –the events that occurred) but must continually plum the depths of the underlying legal and philosophical principles that are associated with the events and laws of the redemption from Egypt. Once this is included as part of the mitzvah of “telling the story of the redemption from Egypt” it is clear to us that no scholar can ever complete the task. But I would ask the following: Of course this is so! Why might we have thought that the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzyaim” (recounting the redemption from Egypt) would be limited to the telling of the series of events that occurred and no more? What about this mitzvah of “seepore” leaves us open to this possible interpretation? Why do we even require the clarification of the Haggadah and in the halachic sources that in-depth analysis of the redemption is part of the mitzvah?
This “Seepore” Different than Other Storytelling
Perhaps we can explain why it is necessary for the Haggadah, the Rambam and the Rav to clarify for us that the mitzvah of recounting the redemption includes in-depth study. First of all, the words “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” is simply translated to “tell the story of the redemption from Egypt”. It is not a mitzvah of Talmud Torah (learning Torah). Telling the story of an event does not usually include an analysis of the underlying concepts beneath the story. If , for example, I describe a hurricane that hit a particular town and destroyed some buildings and uprooted trees, I don’t usually include a discussion of meteorology and how hurricanes are formed. This is not “the telling of the story” of what happened. It is true that many news stories do go into background to explain the story, but these are two separate parts and I could certainly assume that the fulfillment of the mitzvah of “seepore” would be confined to the description of events and would not include the background and analysis. If this is so, then I can see why I would have thought that “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” might be limited to the description of events and, if this is the case, why the great scholars might be exempt. The basic events of the story of the redemption are completely known to them. To recount the events alone would add nothing to their knowledge. So the Haggadah and the halachah comes to tell us that the analysis and background ARE included in the mitzvah of “seepore” and therefore, of course the scholars (even the greatest) scholars can benefit from further delving into the subject and are, therefore, obligated in this mitzvah. It requires explanation why it states in the Haggadah that one is to “recount into the redemption from Egypt” (“beyitziat mitzrayim”) whereas one would think the Haggadah should state to “recount on the redemption from Egypt” (“al yitziat mitzrayim”). It seems that the use of the phrase “beyitziat mitzrayim” is to convey to us that the form and character of the recounting is to be done such that we enter with all our strength into the story and the mitzvah is to tell all the details with full emotion until it seems on account of this telling that one feels as if the he went out of mitzrayim. This is the recounting “into the redemption from Egypt” (“seepore beyitziat mitzrayim”) specifically, to be completely immersed is the body of the story, since this recounting is a “kiyam b’lav” – a fulfillment of the heart- and one is obligated to be completely absorbed into the story.”
But we still have not explained:
1) Why it is that “seepore” ,in the case of the Haggadah, departs from its usual structure and includes background, analysis and studying the underlying principals of the story?
2) If this inclusion of in-depth analysis is part of the mitzvah of recounting the story of the redemption from Egypt, why was the mitzvah called “seepore” and not “limud yitziat mitzrayim” (learning about the redemption from Egypt”?
3) If the mitzvah includes the delving into the depths of study of the redemption and the mitzvoth related to it, why is it that the mitzvah is performed in its optimal way when the facts of the “miracles and wonders” are told to a child who does not yet know the story? If the essence of this mitzvah is the learning dimensio, then it seems to me that the scholar’s “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” should be the optimal way to carry out the mitzvah and not merely the default case which you might not think is even required!
Let’s address these questions one at a time. First – “Why is it that “seepore” includes the in depth analysis?” The usual purpose of “seepore” – the telling of a story - is to relate to someone the external aspects of the event. As the journalists say, the “who, what, where, why, when and how” are the basis of reporting any story. This constitutes the usual boundaries of “seepore”. But the “seepore” of the redemption of the Jewish people from Egypt serves a different purpose from that of the usual story. The fulfillment or “kiym” of the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” is not simply to assure that the reader or listener is informed of an event that occurred in the past. Instead the reader of the Haggadah and those listening are supposed to experience the redemption from Egypt themselves. The Rav explains this in analyzing once again the term “seepore beyitziat mitzrayim” – “to tell the story in the redemption from Egypt.” He focuses again on the unusual use of the term “beyitziat” (in the redemption) instead of “et yitziat” (about the redemption). The Rav states:
We can understand from the Rav’s explanation that the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim” is not simply a case of being informed about something that happened to others. At the seder the person is supposed to re-experience the event of the Exodus himself or herself- to feel it deeply as if it is happening to him or her right at that moment. There is an obligation, it seems, to call upon one’s imagination to relive the actual redemption in all of its glory.
There are other indications in the Haggadh of this obligation to actually experience the redemption from Egypt in the fulfillment of the mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim.” It states in the Haggadah:
In every generation one is obligated to look upon himself as if he personally had gone forth out of Egypt as it says: “And you shall relate to your child on that day, saying: “It is because of this that H’ acted for me when I came forth out of Egypt” (Shemot 13:8). Not only our father did the Holy One, Blessed be He, redeem but us, too, He redeemed together with them, as it says: “And He brought us out from there that He might bring us home to give to us the land which He had sworn to our fathers” (Devarim 6:23)
What does the Haggadah really mean to say when it states that “one is obligated to look upon himself as if (“leyrote et atzmo”) as if he personally had gone forth out of Egypt? You and I were not actually brought out of Egypt with Moshe and Aaron since we had not yet come into existence! Why am I then obligated to look at myself as if I was? It is certainly true that I have benefited from the redemption. In a similar way I would be “saved” if my mother was saved by a lifeguard from drowning when she was a child. The lifeguard did not “save me”. But without the lifeguard’s actions, I would not be alive today. Is this all that is meant by the Haggadah: that I should realize that I owe my current situation of freedom to the redemption from Egypt? If so why does the Haggadah state “to look upon himself as if he personally had gone forth out of Egypt” instead of stating “as if he was redeemed from Egypt.” The Haggadah requires that I look at myself not only as being redeemed through the Exodus but that I was actually “brought forth out of Egypt”! It does seem necessary to actually imagine oneself as going through the experience of the actual redemption. Why is this experiencing of the redemption necessary?
Jew’s Relationship to G… Requires Experiencing the Redemption From Egypt
Perhaps we can explain this requirement in the following manner: The act of redemption from Egypt was not only an historical event that created the Jewish nation at a point in time. The redemption from Egypt is an event that reveals the full relationship of G-d to each Jew. This revelation and the miracles and wonders were not simply to bring the Jews out of slavery to embark on a new path- it was to establish a new level of intimacy in the relationship between G-d and man. Until the redemption, the Creator had not revealed the full expression of his power, his concern for the Jewish people nor his relationship to the affairs of mankind. It is the experiencing of the redemption that fully and revealed G-d to man. The freeing of the Jews from slavery was a historical necessity at that moment for the Jewish people. But more than this, the redemption was G-d revealing of himself to man, so that man could fully embrace their relationship. The Jew is destined and required to have this full relationship with G-d. It is for this reason that every Jew must actually experience the redemption.
But there is a problem. We weren’t all present in Egypt to experience the miracles and wonders and the destruction of the mitzrim at the Yam Soof (Sea of Reeds). So how can we fully encounter G-d? How can we establish this full relationship with our Creator?
A human mind has a unique ability. It can imagine. We must, therefore, deeply imagine ourselves as living through the redemption from Egypt. We need to focus our energies on, not only studying and recounting the details of the miracles and wonders of the redemption, but on imagining ourselves living through these events. In this way we too, to the extent of our abilities to re-imagine it, can also “come forth from Egypt” and establish our fullest relationship with G-d.
The fulfillment of this requirement experiencing the redemption through the process of “seepore” at the seder can be seen as a uniting principal which explains a number of elements of the halachic structure of the Pesach seder.
1) The obligations of pursuing in depth study of the redemption, which the Rav explains as the reason that even the greatest scholar is obligated in the mitzah of “seepore”. From the perspective of reliving the redemption at the seder, this in-depth study can take on a new meaning. We can unite the concepts of “seepore” and Talmud torah in this way: The in-depth study and understanding of an area is a path towards the imagining of the experience. When a scholar studies an area lightly, he learns the facts about the subject and some interesting detail. But an in-depth study of the area allows for a deeper, more personal relationship with an event. The great scholar of any area can reach a point of intimacy with the information where the subject “comes alive” and is re-experienced by him or her. We can understand, in this way, how the in-depth limud of the redemption from Egypt can effectively lead a person to the re-experiencing of the redemption, which we are posing now as a goal of the “seepore”. The study here is not a purely intellectual pursuit, but instead is done to accomplish to “fulfillment of the heart” (“kiyam b’lave”) of personally experiencing the redemption from Egypt. So it now becomes clear why the in-depth learning of the foundations, laws and events of the redemption are part of the mitzvah of seepore. This in-depth learning is an effective method of transforming the seepore into the re-experiencing of the redemption.
2) The eating of the matzah and marror - The statement of “In every generation one is obligated to look upon himself as if he personally went forth from Egypt” is stated in the Haggadah immediately after the fulfillment of the mitzvot of eating the matzah and eating the bitter herb (marror). The eating of these foods is truly an unusual mitzvah. Why do we need to eat matzah to remember the bread of affliction and why do we need to eat marror to recall the bitterness of our enslavement in Egypt? The inclusion of the senses of sight, taste and smell in the “seepore” serves to help transform the recounting of the redemption from the purely abstract, reflective realm and transform it into an aid to the imagination in helping us to relive the redemption experience. It brings our senses and feelings into the retelling of the story and creates something of a re-enactment. Immediately after these mitzvot and the eating of the “sandwich” (koraych) we are enjoined to envision ourselves as personally being redeemed from Egypt. These eating mitzvot assist us in this process.
3) The drinking of the 4 cups of wine – The drinking of four cups of wine is an obligation in “sepore.” It is considered to be a sign of our freedom (“chayros”). But why does the expression of freedom take the form of 4 cups of wine specifically? Perhaps an important benefit of this fairly large amount of wine at the seder is that alcohol assists a person in freeing their imaginative faculty and dulls the dividing point between rationality and imagination to some extent. The mild intoxication experienced at the seder can also serve as an aid in freeing the imagination and assisting the person in imagining him or herself as actually participating in the redemption from Egypt on the night of the seder. One does not usually drink wine while learning. Wine, especially 4 cups of wine, is not conducive to a usual form of in-depth learning. However, when we place as a purpose for the “sepore” the stimulation of a person’s ability to imagine him or herself as being taken out of Egypt that night, the wine can be a definite aid in this process. The “sepore” is certainly a form of learning. But it is a specific type of learning in which one must partake in bold imaginative mental activity that has an almost dreamlike quality, in order to re-experiencing the redemption. For this task, 4 cups of wine are of significant help.
4) The involvement of the children – We have not yet discussed the central role of children in the seder. There is a specific directive in the Torah of telling the story over to your children (“haggaditah luvenchah”). What is the special place of the child in this mitzvah of “seepore yitziat mitzrayim”?
If we maintain our focus on the obligation to re-experience the redemption, we can easily see how children play a major role. Children have the most active imagination, as we see in their games and play. They have little trouble imagining themselves in different roles they read about or create in their fantasies. As their rational factuality and reality testing is still weak, their imagination is less encumbered and is easily capable of dominating their thoughts. Children are therefore the ideal candidates to re-experience the redemption on the seder night. For them it is a much easier task to place themselves back in Egypt, viewing and hearing the miracles and experiencing the joy and exhilaration of the redemption. We, as their parents, must do all we can to draw them into the “sepore” and assist them in living the experience of redemption. Perhaps in focusing on our children on the experiencing of the redemption it also assists us as adults in stimulating our imagination, bringing it to the fore in our own attempt to feel and experience the redemption from Egypt.
I believe we have addressed the three original questions:
1) “Seepore” in this case includes in-depth analysis because this analysis helps us to re-experience the redemption.
2) The mitzvah is not called “limud yitziat mitzrayim” even though it includes in depth learning because the in-depth learning in this particular case is for the sake of experiencing the redemption, experiencing the “seepore”.
3) Children are the optimal recipient of the “seepore” due to their most active imagination and their ability to relive the redemption on the night of the seder.
“Even if We Were All Wise…”
By: Rabbi Richard Borah
No comments:
Post a Comment