Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
In his commentary on the Hagaddah, the Abarbanel explains that all four questions of the Mah Nishtana revolve around a single idea: the apparent contradiction of symbols on Seder night. On one hand, the consumption of matzah and maror evokes a sense of destitution and subjugation. On the other hand, the dipping and leaning indicate royalty and freedom. By noting all four symbols, the perplexed child really asks: on Seder night, are we slaves or are we free?
The Abarbanel explains that the Seder employs contradictory symbols because Pesach represents an instantaneous transition in which Bnei Yisrael experienced both slavery and freedom on a single night. By acknowledging the dire subjugation, a person comes to truly appreciate the magnitude of the salvation. Hence, the matzah and the maror evoke bitter memories of suffering in order to augment the joy of redemption.
The Beis HaLevi (Parshas Beshalach) highlights this value of contrast in explaining an initially perplexing Midrash:
"amar Moshe b'az' chatasi sheamarti, 'ume'az basi ledaber el Pharoh heira la'am hazeh', b'az' ani omer shira - Moshe stated: [With the word] 'az' I sinned when I stated 'Since (ume'az) I came to speak to Pharaoh, he has been evil to this nation;' and with [the word] az, I sing praise (az yashir Moshe).
Moshe Rabbeinu employed the very same term, "az," to describe both the unbearable slavery in Mitzrayim as well as the ineffable joy of the Exodus. This linguistic repetition suggests that Moshe Rabbeinu praised HaKadosh Baruch Hu not only for the eventual salvation, but also for the servitude which preceded the salvation: if not for the prior servitude, no salvation could be possible. The Beis HaLevi adds that this notion also underlies the posuk: "odecha ki anisani vatehi li l'yeshua - I thank You, for You afflicted me, and were for me a salvation" (Tehillim 118). In this posuk, Dovid Hamelech thanks HaKadosh Baruch Hu not only for his salvation, but also for his affliction. Only in the context of the prior affliction can one truly appreciate the salvation.
The Rambam appears to perceive an additional value in recalling the suffering which precedes salvation: beyond stimulating greater appreciation for the salvation itself, our acknowledgment of the prior danger attunes us to the specific reality that HaKadosh Baruch Hu listens to our tefillos and comes to our rescue. In the beginning of his Yad HaChazakah, the Rambam explains that the reason for reading the Megillah - which describes not only the salvation of Klal Yisrael but also the initial danger of Haman's decree - is "keday l'hodia ledoros ha'ba'im she'emmes ma shehivticho baTorah, 'ki mi goy gadol asher lo Elokim krovim elav k'Hashem Elokeinu b'chol koreinu elav - to affirm the fact that HaKadosh Baruch Hu listens and responds to our pleas". Similarly, in the context of Yetziyas Mitzrayim, we not only mention the salvation, but also the initial enslavement, in order to accentuate the fact that HaKadosh Baruch Hu listens to our prayers and comes to our rescue. Perhaps this is the intent of the possuk, when it describes "va'yay'anchu Bnai Yisroel...vayizaku vata'al shavasam el haElokim...vayishma Hashem es na'akasam" immediately after Bnei Yisrael cried out, "Hashem heard their cries."
The value of celebrating both the suffering and the salvation of Pesach night is expressed in other symbols of the Seder as well. The single symbol of matzah represents both "Lechem Oni - poor man's bread," and "Lechem She'Onin Alav D'varim Harbei - bread upon which the Hallel and expressions of thanksgiving" (see Rashi Pesachim 36a) are recited. The maror of Seder night also expresses a similar dichotomy. While it certainly evokes bitter memories of slavery and subjugation, the Gemarah also explains that one should eat lettuce - "chasah" - "mishum she'chas Rachmana ilavan- because HaKadosh Baruch Hu treated us with mercy". Thus, the single symbol of maror also represents both slavery and salvation.
This duality expresses itself in the Rishonim's understanding of the wording of "Ha Lachma Anya": the Rashbam understands the phrase "di achalu avahasana b'arah d'Mitzrayim"as a reference to the matzah eaten with the Korban Pesach as Bnei Yisrael emerged as a free nation on the night of Yetziyas Mitzrayim. The Rashbatz, however, identifies the phrase as an allusion to the matzah eaten before the redemption, over the course of the bitter servitude in Mitzrayim. These oppositional interpretations of "Ha Lachma Anya" appear to mirror the dual symbols embedded within matzah itself - slavery and freedom in a single symbol (see also Ramban al HaTorah, Devarim 16:2, who echoes this sentiment as well, suggesting that matzah tirmoz lishnei devarim)
The Rambam's version of "Ha Lachma Anya" may also underscore this duality. In his text of the Hagaddah, the Rambam prefaces "Ha Lachma Anya" with the phrase: "b'vihilu yatzanu miMitzrayim, halacham anya diachalu avahasana b'arah dMitzrayim - with rapidity, we left Egypt. This is the bread of affliction…" The initial part of the phrase evokes our speedy departure from Mitzrayim as a free nation. The second phrase recalls the horrors of our slavery. The juxtaposition of these two elements suggests that from the depths of slavery and exile can spring hope and salvation.
A similar idea is expressed in Rashi's explanation "Barcuh shomer havtachaso l'Yisroel baruch Hu - Blessed is He Who keeps His promise to Israel."
The Hagaddah does not specify to which promise it refers. The Ritva opines that the Ba'al Hagaddah - refers to the Bris Bein HaBesarim (the Covenant Between the Parts") in which HaKadosh Baruch Hu promised that Avraham Avinu's descendants would be redeemed. Rashi, however, maintains that the promise refers to the servitude itself. According to Rashi's reading, it would appear that the very experience of suffering itself warrants praise and beracha. In this respect, Rashi's understanding of Baruch Shomer Havtachaso may be aptly compared to the Beis HaLevi's understanding of Az Yashir."
Similarly, this lesson is implied in the passage - "yarad l'Mitzrayim anus al pi hadibbur - He [Yaakov Avinu] went down to Egypt, compelled by Devine decree."
Chazal underscore that Yaakov Avinu did not leave Eretz Yisrael willingly. The Ra'avan writes that in theory, Yaakov Avinu should have been forced down to Mitzrayim in iron chains to fulfill the decree of HaKadosh Baruch Hu, if not for the mercy and compassion which HaKadosh Baruch Hu shows to His loved ones. The Midrash Rabbah (Breishis Rabbah 86) similarly analogizes Yaakov's descent to a cow being forced to the slaughterhouse. Although the cow will initially resist with all of its might, it will ultimately submit if it sees its calf being brought to the slaughterhouse. Similarly, HaKadosh Baruch Hu forced Yaakov Avinu to descend to Mitzrayim by first bringing his beloved son, Yosef, down to Mitzrayim.
The Rashbam infers the compulsory nature of Yaakov Avinu's descent from HaKadosh Baruch Hu's placation of his fears: "al tira meireda Mitzrayma - have no fear of descending to Egypt (Bereishes 46:3)." Through this statement, HaKadosh Baruch Hu assuaged Yaakov's fears by guaranteeing him that everything that He does is for the best, as R' Akiva states in Maseches Berachos (60b): kol d'avid Rachmana 'tav avid.
In a related vein, the Sanzer Rebbe (cited by R' Asher Weiss, Haggadas Minchas Asher, p. 393) cited this theme in explanation of the common practice of covering one's eyes at the beginning of keriyas Shema (see Berachos 13b). In affirming "Hashem Elokeinu Hashem Echad," we note the singularity and absolute unity of HaKadosh Baruch Hu in this world. Although din (strict judgment) and rachamim (paternal compassion) appear as distinct attributes to our imprecise perception, these entities are truly one and the same. We thus cover our eyes to represent the fallibility of our limited vision. As we acknowledge the unity of HaKadosh Baruch Hu, we will not allow ourselves to be "blinded" by the apparent existence of suffering and travail in this world.