Difference between revisions of "Haggadah:Yachatz/2"
Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
<p>Since Motzi-Matzah requires at least one whole matzah and a broken piece, the Seder leader breaks a matzah at Yachatz in preparation.</p> | <p>Since Motzi-Matzah requires at least one whole matzah and a broken piece, the Seder leader breaks a matzah at Yachatz in preparation.</p> | ||
<mekorot><multilink><a href="מהרםחלאוהפסחיםקטו-" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="מהרםחלאוהפסחיםקטו-" data-aht="source">Cited in Maharam Chalawa Pesachim 115b</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RitvaHaggadahShelPesach" data-aht="source">Ritva</a><a href="RitvaHaggadahShelPesach" data-aht="source">Haggadah Shel Pesach</a><a href="R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel (Ritva)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RanPesachim25b" data-aht="source">Ran</a><a href="RanPesachim25b" data-aht="source">Commentary on Rif Pesachim 25b</a></multilink></mekorot> | <mekorot><multilink><a href="מהרםחלאוהפסחיםקטו-" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="מהרםחלאוהפסחיםקטו-" data-aht="source">Cited in Maharam Chalawa Pesachim 115b</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RitvaHaggadahShelPesach" data-aht="source">Ritva</a><a href="RitvaHaggadahShelPesach" data-aht="source">Haggadah Shel Pesach</a><a href="R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel (Ritva)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RanPesachim25b" data-aht="source">Ran</a><a href="RanPesachim25b" data-aht="source">Commentary on Rif Pesachim 25b</a></multilink></mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b>Whole vs. broken loaves</b> – | + | <point><b>Whole vs. broken loaves</b> – On Shabbat or Yom Tov one normally makes the blessing of HaMotzi only on whole loaves. However, since "it is the way of the poor" (<a href="BavliPesachim115b-116a" data-aht="source">Bavli Pesachim 115b-116a</a>) to eat only part of a loaf, an exception is made at the Seder where it is customary to use a broken piece of matzah alongside the whole one/s.<fn>There is a debate regarding the number of whole matzot needed.  This is related both to whether or not Yom Tov, like Shabbat, requires לחם משנה, and, if so, whether the broken piece suffices as the second loaf. For a full discussion of the issue and the various customs, see Y. Tabory, "פסח דורות," (Tel Aviv, 1996): 269-306.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Why not break the matzah before Motzi-Matzah?</b> According to the above reasoning, one would have assumed that Yachatz should take place right before Motzi-Matzah, as this is the best way to demonstrate that the broken piece is symbolic of poverty.<fn>This is, in fact, the practice followed by the <multilink><a href="RambamHilchotChametzUMatzah8-6" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamHilkhotChametzuMatzah7-3" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Chametz uMatzah 7:3</a><a href="RambamHilchotChametzUMatzah8-6" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Chametz UMatzah 8:6</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink> (and Yemenites today).</fn> The Ritva and Ran, however, point to R. Hai Gaon who maintains that the lenient ruling regarding blessing over broken pieces applies only if the matzah is already broken.  It would therefore be disrespectful to take a whole loaf and break it in two right before blessing,<fn>According to R. Hai Gaon, R. Papa's statement in <multilink><a href="BavliBerakhot39b" data-aht="source">Bavli Berakhot 39b</a><a href="BavliBerakhot39b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 39b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> regarding blessing over a a broken piece of matzah does not mandate such a custom, but only permits it. As such, it is still preferable to use two while loaves, and the allowance to use a broken piece is conditional.</fn> and thus, the matzah is broken earlier.</point> | <point><b>Why not break the matzah before Motzi-Matzah?</b> According to the above reasoning, one would have assumed that Yachatz should take place right before Motzi-Matzah, as this is the best way to demonstrate that the broken piece is symbolic of poverty.<fn>This is, in fact, the practice followed by the <multilink><a href="RambamHilchotChametzUMatzah8-6" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamHilkhotChametzuMatzah7-3" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Chametz uMatzah 7:3</a><a href="RambamHilchotChametzUMatzah8-6" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Chametz UMatzah 8:6</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink> (and Yemenites today).</fn> The Ritva and Ran, however, point to R. Hai Gaon who maintains that the lenient ruling regarding blessing over broken pieces applies only if the matzah is already broken.  It would therefore be disrespectful to take a whole loaf and break it in two right before blessing,<fn>According to R. Hai Gaon, R. Papa's statement in <multilink><a href="BavliBerakhot39b" data-aht="source">Bavli Berakhot 39b</a><a href="BavliBerakhot39b" data-aht="source">Berakhot 39b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink> regarding blessing over a a broken piece of matzah does not mandate such a custom, but only permits it. As such, it is still preferable to use two while loaves, and the allowance to use a broken piece is conditional.</fn> and thus, the matzah is broken earlier.</point> | ||
<point><b>Why before Maggid specifically?</b> Since it would not be logical to stop Maggid in the middle so as to break the matzah, it is done beforehand.  Moreover, as Maggid opens with "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא" which speaks of "poor man's bread", it is an appropriate place to do so.</point> | <point><b>Why before Maggid specifically?</b> Since it would not be logical to stop Maggid in the middle so as to break the matzah, it is done beforehand.  Moreover, as Maggid opens with "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא" which speaks of "poor man's bread", it is an appropriate place to do so.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Which piece of matzah is the focus?</b> This approach focuses on the piece of matzah to be used later for Motzi-Matzah, viewing the piece saved for the Afikoman as secondary.</point> | + | <point><b>Which piece of matzah is the focus?</b> This approach focuses on the piece of matzah to be used later for Motzi-Matzah, viewing the piece saved for the Afikoman as secondary. [As above, once the matzah was broken, a ritual use was found for the second piece.]</point> |
<point><b>Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented?</b> According to this position, the breaking of the matzah is purely utilitarian in nature, done only to ensure that later in the Seder there will be a broken piece to serve as a symbol of poverty.</point> | <point><b>Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented?</b> According to this position, the breaking of the matzah is purely utilitarian in nature, done only to ensure that later in the Seder there will be a broken piece to serve as a symbol of poverty.</point> | ||
<point><b>Concealing the slice: why?</b> The Ritva explains that the placement under the tablecloth is meant to re-enact the Exodus: "מִשְׁאֲרֹתָם צְרֻרֹת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָם".</point> | <point><b>Concealing the slice: why?</b> The Ritva explains that the placement under the tablecloth is meant to re-enact the Exodus: "מִשְׁאֲרֹתָם צְרֻרֹת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָם".</point> | ||
Line 67: | Line 67: | ||
<point><b>"חוטפין מצות"</b> – This approach could suggest that this is what R. Eliezer in the <a href="ToseftaPesachim10-6" data-aht="source">Tosefta</a> meant by "חוטפין מצות בלילי פסחים בשביל תינוקות שלא ישנו".  Rather than distributing matzah among the Seder participants, it is "snatched away" and hidden. The surprising actions keep the children awake and wondering.</point> | <point><b>"חוטפין מצות"</b> – This approach could suggest that this is what R. Eliezer in the <a href="ToseftaPesachim10-6" data-aht="source">Tosefta</a> meant by "חוטפין מצות בלילי פסחים בשביל תינוקות שלא ישנו".  Rather than distributing matzah among the Seder participants, it is "snatched away" and hidden. The surprising actions keep the children awake and wondering.</point> | ||
<point><b>Stealing the Afikoman</b> – The custom of "stealing the Afikoman" at this point in the Seder might have evolved from a different understanding of R. Eliezer's comment, that it is the children rather than adults who "snatch" the Afikoman.  The point is the same, to keep the youngsters involved and questioning.</point> | <point><b>Stealing the Afikoman</b> – The custom of "stealing the Afikoman" at this point in the Seder might have evolved from a different understanding of R. Eliezer's comment, that it is the children rather than adults who "snatch" the Afikoman.  The point is the same, to keep the youngsters involved and questioning.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Why before Maggid?</b> This position might suggest that there is no real significance to the placement of the custom before Maggid.  It is but one of many actions done throughout the Seder to raise the curiosity of its participants, and could really have taken place at any point. Alternatively, the custom precedes Maggid since telling the story is supposed to be accomplished via questions and answers | + | <point><b>Why before Maggid?</b> This position might suggest that there is no real significance to the placement of the custom before Maggid.  It is but one of many actions done throughout the Seder to raise the curiosity of its participants, and could really have taken place at any point. Alternatively, the custom precedes Maggid since telling the story is supposed to be accomplished via questions and answers and the breaking of the matzah provokes questioning.</point> |
− | <point><b>Enslavement vs. redemption</b> – Yachatz has no inherent symbolism, and any other surprising action might have served the same goal.  This, though, is one of the weaknesses of this approach, as it would seem to be preferable to involve the children through actions which have some significance for the evening and invite questions which will relate to the experiences in Egypt.</point> | + | <point><b>Enslavement vs. redemption</b> – According to this understanding, Yachatz has no inherent symbolism, and any other surprising action might have served the same goal.  This, though, is one of the weaknesses of this approach, as it would seem to be preferable to involve the children through actions which have some significance for the evening and invite questions which will relate to the experiences in Egypt.</point> |
</category> | </category> | ||
</approaches> | </approaches> | ||
</page> | </page> | ||
</aht-xml> | </aht-xml> |
Version as of 00:54, 21 March 2018
Yachatz
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
The custom of Yachatz has been understood in varying ways. According to one possibility cited by the Orchot Chayyim, the practice is directly linked to the opening of Maggid and the recitation of "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא". Immediately before speaking of "poor man's bread" we break our matzah into pieces, transforming it into a symbol of poverty. Others view Yachatz as preparation for later parts of the Seder. Ramban, thus, maintains that splitting the matzah is necessary for Motzi-Matzah which requires both a whole and broken piece of Matzah. The Or Zarua, in contrast, focuses on the concealment rather than splitting of the matzah, and asserts that the custom developed to ensure that sufficient matzah is saved for the Afikoman. A final approach suggests that there is nothing intrinsically symbolic or utilitarian about Yachatz, and the custom was only implemented so as to arouse the curiosity of the children.
Preparation for Recitation
The matzah is broken in anticipation of beginning Maggid, since this recitation necessitates having "poor man's bread" (i.e. a broken loaf) in front of the Seder participants.
- "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא" – Most of these sources state that it is required specifically for "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא," since the passage explicitly refers to "poor man's bread". Thus, while reciting "this is the bread of the poor," there is an example placed in front of the Seder participants.
- "מַגִּיד" – In contrast, Shulchan Arukh HaRav explains that all of Maggid must be recited in the presence of a broken matzah. He points to the two explanations of "לחם עוני" given in Bavli Pesachim 115b-116a, that it is both "bread over which one answers matters" (i.e. over which one recites the Haggadah) and that it is "poor man's bread" (i.e. a broken piece). As such, he learns that a broken loaf must be present throughout the recitation of the Haggadah.
Preparation for Eating
Splitting the matzah is done in preparation for eating one of its parts later in the Seder. This position divides regarding whether the piece is being saved for Motzi-Matzah or for the Afikoman.
Motzi–Matzah
Since Motzi-Matzah requires at least one whole matzah and a broken piece, the Seder leader breaks a matzah at Yachatz in preparation.
- Ramban suggests that being "חוטף מצה", instead, refers to the fact that after removing the Seder plate, the leader would act as if the meal was over, and if any child attempted to take more matzah, he would snatch his hand away. Such unexpected behavior would lead the child to question.
- The Ran, following Rashbam, also suggests that the practice refers to taking away matzah from the children, but posits that this is meant to keep them from falling asleep on a full stomach.
Afikoman
The matzah is broken in order to save part for the end of the meal and ensure that there will be sufficient matzah for the Afikoman.
Ploy to Involve the Children
Yachatz is intended to provoke questions from the children participating at the Seder.