Chametz and Matzah in Pesach Mitzrayim/2

Chametz and Matzah in Pesach Mitzrayim

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Seven Day Prohibition of Chametz

The Israelites celebrated a seven day holiday in Egypt, just as they did in future generations.  Chametz was prohibited for the entire week.

Sources:Tanna Kama in Tosefta PesachimPesachim 8:21About the Tosefta, RambanShemot 12:21-51Shemot 13:2Vayikra 23:2Bemidbar 9:1Devarim 16:2Devarim 16:2About R. Moshe b. Nachman, AbarbanelShemot 12:15About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel

Hashem's commands to Moshe: one holiday or two? According to this position, the Pesach offering and following seven day holiday of Chag HaMatzot comprise one integrated unit.¹ Hashem commanded Moshe about both since both were to be observed in Egypt. 

Which commands were relayed to the nation in Egypt? Ramban explains that even though the Torah only records Moshe relaying the commands regarding the Pesach offering (12:21-27), it can be assumed that he relayed all that Hashem had told him beforehand, including the laws of chametz and matzah.² When verse 28 writes, "וַיַּעֲשׂוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה י"י אֶת מֹשֶׁה" this indicates that the nation observed all that Hashem had commanded.

"וַיֹּאפוּ אֶת הַבָּצֵק... עֻגֹת מַצּוֹת כִּי לֹא חָמֵץ כִּי גֹרְשׁוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם" – Ramban explains that the real reason that the nation baked matzot was due to Hashem's command not to have leavened bread.  This verse is only coming to explain that due to their hasty departure, they did not have time to bake matzah in Egypt proper, but were instead forced to do so en route.³

Institution of Chag HaMatzot - why? This position must explain what was the purpose of the original command:

• Future event – The Avudraham, quoting R. Yosef Kimchi, suggests that the command was given based on the future event of being chased out.  Hashem knew in advance that they would be forced to flee, without time to bake matzot, and gave them a command which they would only understand later.  This explanation, however, fails to account for the fact that if the nation were baking matzah due to the command, the fact that they were chased out would have had no practical consequences. 
• Highlight haste – Abarbanel, thus, explains that Hashem wanted to highlight the speed in which the nation left.  Even though they were never planning on baking anything other than matzah, they did not even have time to do that.  Moreover, they moved so quickly that the bread had still not risen by the time they arrived in Sukkot and had time to bake it.⁴
• Poor mans' bread – In his comments on Devarim 16, Ramban explains that the matzah was supposed to commemorate the meager food that they were given to eat as slaves in Egypt.  It is not clear, however, why, at the time of the Exodus, it would be necessary for the Israelites  to reenact what they lived daily.

Why seven days specifically? This position might suggest that there is no special significance to the length of the holiday. Many festivals were set to be seven days long.  Abarbanel adds that had the holiday only been one day long, its significance  would not be felt since often someone might go for a day without eating leavened bread.  Moreover, Hashem wanted the nation to celebrate from the day of the Exodus until the drowning of Paroh (the final stage of the redemption).

Matzah with the Pesach offering – These sources would explain that the command to eat matzah with the offering was part of the larger command to eat matzah and refrain from chametz the entire week long.

"שִׁבְעַת יָמִים תֹּאכַל עָלָיו מַצּוֹת לֶחֶם עֹנִי כִּי בְחִפָּזוֹן יָצָאתָ "

• According to Ramban, the verse gives two reasons for the obligation to eat matzah, the haste of the redemption (as evidenced by the fact that there was no time to bake maztot while in Egpt) and the fact that matzah represents "לֶחֶם עֹנִי". He might say that only the second reason applied to the Isarelites in Egypt, but in Devarim, Moshe is speaking to future generations who also commemorate the events that occurred while leaving.
• Abarbanel, in contrast, highlights only the explanation relating to the haste of the redemption  "כִּי בְחִפָּזוֹן יָצָאתָ".  He might explain "לֶחֶם עֹנִי" to be a description of matzah and not a reason for its being eaten.

Which takes precedence – eating matzah or refraining from chametz? Both Ramban and Abarbanel asserts that throughout the week, one is permitted, but not obligated to eat matzah.  Since the commandment did not relate to commemorating a seven day event of eating matzah, but rather

Chag HaMatzot in the Wilderness – According to Ramban, just as the nation kept both Pesach and Chag HaMatzot while in Egypt, they continued to do so during their sojourn in the wilderness.⁵

Laws of Pesach in Shemot 43ff

• Ramban maintains that the laws in these verses also applied in Egypt, as proven form the summary statement which follows, " וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כׇּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה י"י".‎⁶ He explains that they are separated from the initial laws for literary reasons.
• Abarbanel disagrees, and maintains that these laws applied only to future generations, which is why they were commanded separately from the earlier ones.⁷ The summary statement only teaches that in the future the nation did as commanded.

Commands of Shemot 13:3ff – This position must explain why, if Moshe had already relayed the laws of Chag HaMatzot to the nation, he does so again in Chapter 13:

• Ramban implies that these laws were relayed after the Exodus to teach the nation that they were to apply in the Wilderness.⁸
• Abarbanel, instead, suggests that Hashem introduced the new law regarding consecration of firstborns and wanted to juxtapose it with the laws of Pesach and Chag HaMaztot since the threesome together speaks to the various aspects of the redemption.  In addition, there is a new emphasis here on passing these teachings to the new generation.

No Prohibition of Chametz

In Egypt, the Children of Israel did not celebrate Chag HaMatzot.  Though they ate the Pesach sacrifice with matzah, they were not prohibited from eating chametz, nor obligated to eat matzah the week afterwards.

Sources:Mishna PesachimPesachim 9:5About the Mishna, Ibn EzraShemot Long Commentary 12:14-51Shemot Long Commentary 13:8Shemot Long Commentary 40:2Shemot Short Commentary 12:14Shemot Short Commentary 13:5About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Yosef ibn KaspiShemot 12:15:21About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi, Rashbaz, ShadalShemot 12:14Shemot 12:21Shemot 13:3About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto, Hoil Moshe, R. David Zvi HoffmannShemot 12, IntroductionShemot 12:14-15Shemot 12:39Shemot 12:46, 50About R. David Zvi Hoffmann

Hashem's command to Moshe: one holiday or two? According to these commentators, Hashem commanded Moshe about two distinct celebrations: Chag HaPesach (12:1-13) which refers to the Pesach sacrifice which was to be eaten on the fourteenth of Nissan at twilight, and Chag HaMatzot (12:14-20) which refers to the future seven day holiday in which the nation was supposed to eat matzah and refrain from eating chametz.⁹

Which commands were relayed to the nation in Egypt? Moshe relayed only those commands which were immediately relevant to the nation in Egypt: those regarding the Pesach offering (12:21-27).  Since Chag HaMatzot was intended only for future generations (וְחַגֹּתֶם אֹתוֹ חַג לַי"י לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם) and the people were not obligated to celebrate it in Egypt, the nation were first told it about it only after they left (in 13:3-8).¹⁰

Why no Chag HaMatzot? According to this position the act which Chag HaMatzot was instituted to commemorate had not yet happened,¹¹ so there was nothing to mark.  R. D"Z Hoffmann and the Hoil Moshe add that it would not make sense that as the nation was about to embark on a journey in the wilderness, that they would be commanded to celebrate a seven day holiday, especially when creative work was prohibited on the very day that they were supposed to leave.¹²

Why was Moshe told about the holiday earlier? These sources might suggest that Hashem commanded Moshe about both the laws for the present and the future together, since they are linked, and unlike the Israelites, Moshe would be able to handle such information.

"וַיֹּאפוּ אֶת הַבָּצֵק... עֻגֹת מַצּוֹת כִּי לֹא חָמֵץ כִּי גֹרְשׁוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם" – These sources point to this verse as proof that the nation was not prohibited from eating chametz, as it suggests that had they not been chased out, the people were planning on baking leavened bread.¹³ Only because they had no time were they not able to.

Institution of Chag HaMatzot – These sources explain that the seven day holiday was instituted to commemorate the fact that the nation did not even have time for their bread to rise before being chased out of Egypt, forcing them to eat matzah.

Why seven days specifically?

• Ibn Ezra explains that the people were on the run until Paroh drowned in Yam Suf seven days after the Exodus.¹⁴  As such, they subsisted on matzah for the entire week.  In commemoration, future generations do the same.
• Ibn Kaspi, in contrast, asserts that the choice of seven days is unrelated to the original act which was being commemorated and it is possible that the people only ate matzot for a day or two. Hashem chose seven days since that is the norm for holiday length in the Torah.¹⁵ 

Which takes precedence – eating matzah or refraining from chametz?

• Obligation of matzah -– Ibn Ezra maintains that according to the simple sense of the verses, it is not just permissible to eat matzot for the seven days of the holiday, but there is an obligation to do so throughout.  This works with his understanding that the point of the holiday is to commemorate the nation's similar eating of matzot.  According to him, it is possible that the prohibition of chamtetz simply comes to highlight the eating of matzah. 
•  Prohibition of chametz – One might disagree, however, and claim that the point being remembered is the fact that the bread did not have time to rise. Eating matzah was simply the alternative left to the nation, but not important in its own right.  Thus, throughout he holiday one is prohibited from eating chametz, but not obligated to eat matzah.

"שִׁבְעַת יָמִים תֹּאכַל עָלָיו מַצּוֹת לֶחֶם עֹנִי" – These sources might suggest that the phrase "לֶחֶם עֹנִי" is simply a description of the matzah,¹⁶ not the reason for eating it for seven days. Only the following words "כִּי בְחִפָּזוֹן יָצָאתָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם" provide the reason for the holiday.

Eating matzah with the Pesach offering – According to this position the reason for eating matzah with the Pesach is unconnected to the eating of matzah throughout the week of Chag HaMatzot.  A variety of reasons are given for the command:

• Haste – Ibn Kaspi¹⁷ suggests that this obligation is related to many other aspects of the Pesach offering, including its being roasted and eaten ready to go, which are symbolic of haste.  He does not explain if this was related to the need to eat the sacrifice before the Plague of Firstborns or due to the speedy nature of the redemption.   Either way this haste is distinct from the later haste of the actual exodus when there was no time for the bread to rise.
• Bread of Affliction – Orchot HaChayyim quotes Ibn Ezra as suggesting that the Egyptians fed the Israelites matzah when they were slaves since it takes a long time to digest., and implies that perhaps it was this aspect of the oppression that was being symbolized by the matzah that accompanied the Pesach.  This, though, is difficult since there would have been no need to do commemorate the enslavement while they were still living it.
• Demonstration against idolatry – See Purpose of the Pesach that the offering might have been a demonstration against idolatry. The RambamMoreh Nevukhim 3:46About R. Moshe b. Maimon asserts that idolatrous sacrifices were normally accompanied by leavened bread and honey.  It is possible, that to counter such practices, the Pesach was instead accompanied by matzah and maror.
• Accompaniment to a קרבן תודה – According to R. D"Z Hoffmann, the Pesach was in essence a thanksgiving offering (קרבן תודה).¹⁸  If so, like all such offerings, it was brought with matzot.¹⁹

Chag HaMatzot in the Wilderness – Ibn Ezra learns from 13:5, "כִי יְבִיאֲךָ י"י אֶל אֶרֶץ הַכְּנַעֲנִי" that not only did the nation not keep Chag HaMatzot in Egypt, but that they were not obligated to observe it until entry into the land.²⁰  Only the new generation had to set aside time to remember the original events ("וְהָיָה הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה לָכֶם לְזִכָּרוֹן"); the earlier one had witnessed it by themselves.

Laws of Pesach in Shemot 43ff – Ibn Ezra posits that these laws relating to the Pesach offering were meant only for future generations and did not apply in Egypt.  It is for this reason that they are written separately.²¹  This reading forces Ibn Ezra to understand the summary statement "וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כׇּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה י"י" to refer to the nation keeping these laws when they observed Peach in the Sinai desert the following year.²²

וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כׇּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה י"י

One Day Prohibition of Chametz

In Egypt, the nation was only prohibited from eating chametz for one day.

Sources:R. Yose Ha Gelili in Tosefta PesachimPesachim 8:21About the Tosefta, Bavli PesachimPesachim 96a-bAbout the Bavli, Ran

¹ See Pesach and Chag HaMatzot – A Two for One? for a discussion of the relationship between the two celebrations.

² Ramban explains that it is the way of the text to be brief in one place and lengthy in another. Instead of tediously repeating both a command and its fulfillment, sometimes the Torah only brings one or the other.   For other places where he uses this principle, see his comments to Bereshit 31:7, 42:21, 44:7, Shemot 4:17, Bemidbar 20:14,and 21:13 and see Invoking Hashem's Name Without Explicit Divine Sanction for elaboration].

³ Ramban's explanation might be supported by the fact that the verse speaks of the "dough" which they took out of Egypt ("הַבָּצֵק אֲשֶׁר הוֹצִיאוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם").  They left so quickly that they had to take their unbaked dough with them.  He would likely understand the term "כִּי לֹא חָמֵץ" to mean that the dough had not contained any leavening (due to the command).

⁴ Abarbanel emphasizes that only because they had been commanded to make matzah did they appreciate just how quickly they left Egypt.  Being the first commandment that they received, the people wanted to be very careful about its observance.  Thus, when they were forced to leave before baking the matzah, they were very fearful that their bread would rise and they would not be able to observe the commandment properly.  After arriving in Sukkot and seeing that the bread still had not risen they realized just how quickly they had departed.

⁵ He acknowledges that according to the Sages the nation only kept one Pesach in the wilderness since they were not able to circumcise their children in the dangers of the route.

⁶ Since verse 28 already states that the commands of verses 1-20 were fulfilled, this statement is only necessary if it refers to  a new set of laws.

⁷ He claims that, after the Plague of Firstborns, when many Egyptians wanted to join the nation, Hashem needed to tell the nation new laws regarding a foreigner who wants to partake in future offerings.. 

⁸ Considering that Moshe had already mentioned that they were also for future generations, the repetition is still troubling.   Ramban might explain that Moshe was clarifying that they were to apply even before entry into the land.

⁹ See Pesach and Chag HaMatzot – A Two for One? for a discussion of the distinct nature of the two celebrations and when they appear to have merged into one holiday.

¹⁰ This understanding works with a straightforward reading of the verses which do not present Moshe as relaying Hashem's commands of 12:14-20 until chapter 13.

¹¹ See point below that according to this position the holiday was instituted to remember the fact that the nation were chased out in such haste that they did not have time for their bread to rise and were forced to bake matzot.

¹² It is also possible that the people did not even know that they were supposed to be leaving for good, and believed that they were going for just a three day journey, in which case it would make even less sense to already tell them about a holiday for future generations.  See A Three Day Journey? for the opinion that the three day ruse was intended for the nation itself who would have been fearful and reluctant to leave Egypt if they thought that it was forever.

¹³ See both Ibn Ezra and Shadal that the phrase "כִּי לֹא חָמֵץ" is a verbal clause, meaning "because [the dough] did not rise."  The verse is not saying that the nation made matzot because they did not put leavening into their bread, but rather that despite doing so, the bread did not rise.

¹⁴ He points to the verse "לָלֶכֶת יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה", as evidence for the fact that the people had no time to pause and walked both day and night.

¹⁵ He explains that a commemoration does not have to match the original act in all its details.  As evidence, he points out that the holiday of Sukkot, too, is celebrated for seven days even though it is commemorating forty years worth of wandering in the wilderness.

¹⁶ See the Ritva who asserts that matzah is called poor man's bread because it is flat and simple.

¹⁷ See Rashbam similarly.

¹⁸ For elaboration on his understanding of the Pesach, see Purpose of the Pesach.

¹⁹ See R"M Spiegelman, פרשת בא - חג הפסח and R"Y Grossman, פרשת בא - פסח - קרבן או סעודה who elaborate on this idea and the many similarities between the laws of Pesach and those of sacrifices as a whole.

²⁰ He points out that in the Wilderness, with only manna to eat , it would have been impossible to find enough matzah for the week.  He claims that in Sinai, even though they were close to settled lands, it was incredible that they were able to find sufficient matzah to eat for even just the one night with the Pesach sacrifice. According to Ibn Ezra, this was the only time throughout the forty years that they brought the Pesach itself as well, as the commandment is really contingent on living in the land ("וְהָיָה כִּי תָבֹאוּ אֶל הָאָרֶץ").

²¹ However, according to this reasoning, it is not clear why the laws of Chag HaMatzot, similarly only for the future, were not also written as an appendix.

²² He supports the idea that a story might end with discussion of a commandment's fulfillment even if it occurred only a year or more later from the mention of storing of the manna in Shemot 16, which similarly occurred a while after the original story being discussed.  [For a discussion of epilogues and the example of the manna in particular,, see Epilogue to the Manna Story.]