Razbag 5785 / Passover Pesach/ חַג הַפֶּסַח‎ / for 5785 скачать в хорошем качестве

Razbag 5785 / Passover Pesach/ חַג הַפֶּסַח‎ / for 5785

Pesach Hagaddah 5785 The mishna in arvei pesachim, 116a teaches the mah nishtana, and then concludes: וּלְפִי דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁל בֵּן אָבִיו מְלַמְּדוֹ. מַתְחִיל בִּגְנוּת וּמְסַיֵּים בְּשֶׁבַח. וְדוֹרֵשׁ מֵ״אֲרַמִּי אוֹבֵד אָבִי״, עַד שֶׁיִּגְמוֹר כׇּל הַפָּרָשָׁה כּוּלָּהּ. And according to the intelligence and the ability of the son, his father teaches him about the Exodus. When teaching his son about the Exodus. He begins with the Jewish people’s disgrace and concludes with their glory. And he expounds from the passage: “An Aramean tried to destroy my father” (Deuteronomy 26:5), the declaration one recites when presenting his first fruits at the Temple, until he concludes explaining the entire section. Note that the order is that the type of education is according to the son's intelligence, start with disgrace and end in glory. The pericope that will be studied in its entirety is parashat bikurim in Deuteronomy. Presumably, one wold study exodus 12 or perhaps Exodus 11 and 12 or maybe the first 15 chapters of Exodus, The mishna teaches that only the short parashat bikuim section will be studied. The mishna says He begins with disgrace and ends with glory: The Talmud continues: מַתְחִיל בִּגְנוּת וּמְסַיֵּים בְּשֶׁבַח. מַאי בִּגְנוּת? רַב אָמַר: ״מִתְּחִלָּה עוֹבְדֵי עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה הָיוּ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ״. [וּשְׁמוּאֵל] אָמַר: ״עֲבָדִים הָיִינוּ״. It was taught in the mishna that the father begins his answer with disgrace and concludes with glory. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the term: With disgrace? Rav said that one should begin by saying: At first our forefathers were idol worshippers, before concluding with words of glory. And Shmuel said: The disgrace with which one should begin his answer is: We were slaves. then there is an often overlooked end note: אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן לְדָרוּ עַבְדֵּיהּ: עַבְדָּא דְּמַפֵּיק לֵיהּ מָרֵיהּ לְחֵירוּת, וְיָהֵיב לֵיהּ כַּסְפָּא וְדַהֲבָא, מַאי בָּעֵי לְמֵימַר לֵיהּ? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בָּעֵי לְאוֹדוֹיֵי וּלְשַׁבּוֹחֵי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פְּטַרְתַּן מִלּוֹמַר ״מָה נִשְׁתַּנָּה״. פָּתַח וְאָמַר ״עֲבָדִים הָיִינוּ״. Rav Naḥman said to his servant, Daru: With regard to a slave who is freed by his master, who gives him gold and silver, what should the slave say to him? Daru said to him: He must thank and praise his master. He said to him: If so, you have exempted us from reciting the questions of: Why is this night different, as you have stated the essence of the seder night. Rav Naḥman immediately began to recite: We were slaves. What is the purpose of this end note between Rav Nahman and his servant Daru? Rashbam makes little halachich use of it. Rashbam writes: פתח ואמר - לאחר שאילת הבן In other words, Rav nahman still had to engage with his sons, and the dialectic with the servant was just pedagogical, in order to include the servant into the table conversation. I feel that there is more. Note that the mishna teaches the mah nishtana, and then instructs the nature of the education to be on the level of the individual, from disgrace to glory. Rav Nahman asked daru a question that begins with disgrace and ends with glory. It was Daru who answered that according to what we call today, Natural law, meaning, a divinely decreed law based on common sense, that the master shoudol be acknowledged and praised. But Rav Nahman at at poiint ought to have said: You have expemted us from the hagadaddh. But he didn't. Only you have expempted us from the mah nishtana. The question is : What is the purpose of this story and why mah nishtana, and not exempted from everything? The simple answer could be that the servant had an inferior intellect and was unfamilar with the mah nishtanna. By engaging with Daru directly, he was bringing the servant to the hagaddah mileu. Could the notion of the mah nishtana be simply asking a passover related qeustion? The mah nishtana is questions about the night and Rav Nahman's question is about somethitn that will ojnly happen later in the evening? Either way, I would like to make the following obervation. What is primary, the pericope of bikurim or the rule of matchil bgnut umesayem beshevach? The mishna first gives the rule of the spirit of the study session. First matchil bgnut umesayem beshevach. And only then does it instrtucs the study of Bikurim. In other words, one is not capable of fulfilling the mitzvah of hagaddah without concluding with glory and praise. Study of parashat bikurim is not a suggested text, but a requested text, because Exodus 1 through Exodus 14 contains no praise. The praise only begins on Exodus 15. That is a tall task, requring people to read all fifteen chapters of Exodus because the required praise begsin in chapter 15. Back to Rav Nahman's servant Daru. It remains an unanswered question, what exactly Daru expemted the party from reciting or why that questino was in place of Mah nishtana. But I think there is something prfound. We would have expected Rav Nahman to tell Daru that we ar