Post by Akiva on Mar 31, 2011 13:59:44 GMT -5
In this thread I discussed an approach to Maggid that viewed all portions of Maggid as, in some way, being acts of Sippur Yetziat Mitzrayim (as opposed to merely digressions or instructions for how to engage in Sippur). If that is the correct understanding of Maggid, the reference to Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya not understanding why we should mention Yetziat Mitzrayim in the nightly Shma until he heard a nice drasha from Ben Zoma raises obvious questions. How does this deepen our understanding of the slavery in or the exodus from Egypt?
I think that answering this question begins with another question: why did Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya think we shouldn't be referencing Yetziat Mitzrayim in our nightly Shma?
An insight from Rabbi Dr. Avraham Twersky's Haggada may help answer this. Rabbi Dr. Twersky points out that one of the key differences between Jews and non-Jews is their approach to rest and work. Both Jews and non-Jews have a day of rest once a week. But while Jews work in order to be able to rest on Shabbos, non-Jews rest one day a week in order to be able to work more efficiently.
Perhaps this concept can be extended to the existence of the Jews in Egypt, and their experience at night. At night, they came home, ate, were with their family, and slept. Thus, you might think that the slavery did not extend to the nights - they were slaves during the day, but free at night. If that's true, we can understand Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya's thought process - if recalling Yetziat Mitzrayim is an expression of praise and thanks for our freedom, and we were already free at night, why should we say it at night?
Ben Zoma's drasha comes to explain that no, even though the Jews were not working at night, their rest was not the rest of free men. It was the rest of slaves - rest granted to them solely because it would enable them to work the next day. Thus, the enslavement in Egypt extended even to their "free time" at night, and mentioning Yetziat Mitzrayim in the nightly Shma is appropriate.
Understood in this way, this portion of the Haggada fits nicely with our approach to Maggid - the question and answer help deepen our understanding of the slavery in Egypt, and it is thus an integral part of Sippur
I think that answering this question begins with another question: why did Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya think we shouldn't be referencing Yetziat Mitzrayim in our nightly Shma?
An insight from Rabbi Dr. Avraham Twersky's Haggada may help answer this. Rabbi Dr. Twersky points out that one of the key differences between Jews and non-Jews is their approach to rest and work. Both Jews and non-Jews have a day of rest once a week. But while Jews work in order to be able to rest on Shabbos, non-Jews rest one day a week in order to be able to work more efficiently.
Perhaps this concept can be extended to the existence of the Jews in Egypt, and their experience at night. At night, they came home, ate, were with their family, and slept. Thus, you might think that the slavery did not extend to the nights - they were slaves during the day, but free at night. If that's true, we can understand Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya's thought process - if recalling Yetziat Mitzrayim is an expression of praise and thanks for our freedom, and we were already free at night, why should we say it at night?
Ben Zoma's drasha comes to explain that no, even though the Jews were not working at night, their rest was not the rest of free men. It was the rest of slaves - rest granted to them solely because it would enable them to work the next day. Thus, the enslavement in Egypt extended even to their "free time" at night, and mentioning Yetziat Mitzrayim in the nightly Shma is appropriate.
Understood in this way, this portion of the Haggada fits nicely with our approach to Maggid - the question and answer help deepen our understanding of the slavery in Egypt, and it is thus an integral part of Sippur
