Difference between revisions of "Haggadah:Arami Oved Avi – Devarim vs. Shemot/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
THIS TOPIC IS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS
m |
|||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<page type="Approaches"> | <page type="Approaches"> | ||
<h1>Arami Oved Avi – Devarim vs. Shemot</h1> | <h1>Arami Oved Avi – Devarim vs. Shemot</h1> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <div><b><center>THIS TOPIC IS CURRENTLY IN PROGRESS</center></b></div> | ||
<approaches> | <approaches> |
Version as of 00:05, 29 March 2015
Arami Oved Avi – Devarim vs. Shemot
Exegetical Approaches
First Person Narrative
As opposed to the narrative of Sefer Shemot which is written in third person, the retelling in Devarim is written in first person.
Sources:Gri"d
Re-experiencing Egypt – On Pesach there is an obligation for each person to see themselves as if they personally left Egypt: "בכל דוד ודור חייב אדם לראות את עצמו כאילו הוא יצא ממצרים". Thus, a retelling which is told from the perspective of the speaker, in which he totally identifies with those who were actually enslaved and redeemed, is optimal.1
Lesson in empathy – R. Riskin2 further suggests that personal identification with the plight of slavery is more likely to imbue the speaker with empathy for the unfortunate. One of the goals of remembering the oppression in Egypt is to learn to care for the down trodden and treat them with sympathy.3
Familiar Text
The text from Devarim was chosen since it was familiar to people from the ceremony of first fruits.
Commandment for all – According to this approach, the sages wanted the retelling and learning to be accessible to all; the remembering of the Exodus was not meant to be limited to the elite. Thus, they purposefully chose a text that even a layperson would know and be able to study.
When was the Haggadah established? This position assumes that this part of the Haggadah was already established in the times of the Temple when people would still be bringing first fruits. Shemuel and Zev Safrai5 reject this assumption, claiming that it was first several decades after the destruction of the Temple that the Haggadah began to be put together, by which point the text of Devarim 26 would no longer have been said on a regular basis.
Was מקרא ביכורים really familiar? The Mishnah in Bikkurim 3:7 states that if one did not know how to read the passage from Devarim in Hebrew, another would dictate it to him, suggesting that even in Temple times the text was not well known to many.6 Moreover, even if the verses themselves were known, it is highly unlikely that laymen were acquainted with the derashot expounding upon them.7
Brief Summary
Devarim 26 is a concise retelling that still manages to incorporate the essential points of the story.
Sources:Commentary attributed to Malbim
Practical issues – According to this position, the choice was a practical one. It would be very difficult and time consuming to expound upon several chapters of Shemot8 so a shorter version of the story was chosen.9
What about Bemidbar 20:15-16? If brevity alone were to explain the choice of text, it would seem that Bemidbar 20:15-16 would be an even better option as it manages to include the main points of the story in but 2 verses! Why, then, was it not chosen?
- Hashem's direct role – It is possible that Bemidbar was rejected since Bemidbar reads, "וַיִּשְׁלַח מַלְאָךְ וַיֹּצִאֵנוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם", while Devarim emphasizes Hashem's direct role, "וַיּוֹצִאֵנוּ ה' מִמִּצְרַיִם".
- Arrival in Israel – In addition, many suggest that originally Devarim 26:9 which speaks of arrival in Israel ("וַיְבִאֵנוּ אֶל הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה") was included in the learning10 and it was this added aspect of the story that made Devarim the preferred option. Coming to Hashem's promised land would have been seen as the ultimate step in the redemptive process.
- Cycles of anti-Semitism – R. Riskin11 highlights how only Devarim gives the background for the oppression, and as such captures the essence of the cycles of anti-Semitism throughout Jewish history.12 Again and again Jews move into exile thinking that the move is just temporary, but instead become comfortable and settle, often assimilating, and eventually rising to greatness in their new home. This arouses jealousy and oppression, leading the nation to return and cry out to Hashem who then answers their prayers. The Devarim text thus aptly explains why the story of Egyptian bondage can recur in every generation, "בכל דוד ודור עומדים עלינו לכלותנו...".
- Allusion to the Covenant between the Pieces – Another advantage of the retelling of Devarim is that, unlike Bemidbar, it alludes to the fulfillment of the Covenant Between the Pieces.13 Each of its verses uses language that recalls the original decree of descent and salvation.14 This is particularly appropriate, considering that the lines right before the midrash in the Haggadah speak of the covenant.
- Context of thanksgiving – Finally, Bemidbar's context is one of asking for a favor while the context of Devarim 26 is one of expressing gratitude, a theme more in line with the holiday.15
Fulfillment of story-telling requirements
The passage from Devarim fits many of the instructions given in the Torah and Mishnah regarding how one should tell the story.
"וְהִגַּדְתָּ" – R. D"Z Hoffmann points out that when bringing first fruits, the Israelite begins his recitation by saying, "הִגַּדְתִּי הַיּוֹם" much like the command, "וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא".
"מתחיל בגנות..." – Abarbanel points out that the Bikkurim text is an apt choice for thanksgiving since it begins with denigration and ends with praise, just as suggested by the Mishnah.16
"וְעָנִיתָ" – On Pesach, one is meant to tell the story not just to one's self but to others as well. As such, it is not surprising that the question–answer format is characteristic of much of the Seder. The Bikkurim ceremony which involved a telling in the presence of another (the priest) and which opens, "וְעָנִיתָ וְאָמַרְתָּ" seemed an appropriate choice of text.