Haggadah:Yachatz/2

Yachatz

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

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.

Reenactment of the Exodus

The matzah is broken and transformed into symbols of the Exodus as an introduction to Maggid.  The smaller piece represents "poor man's bread,"  reminiscent of the bondage, while the concealed piece recalls the wrapped dough of the Israelites during the redemption.

Sources:Sefer HaItturHilkhot Matzah UMaror,¹ Raah and Rashbacited by the Ritva, Haggadah Shel PesachAbout R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel, Orchot ChayyimSeder Leil HaPesach 12 #1, AvudrahamAvudraham Seder HaHaggadah, Shulchan Arukh HaRavOrach Chayyim 472:1Orach Chayyim 473:35-36Orach Chayyim 475:4-5

Yachatz and Ha Lachma Anya – This position views Yachatz and Ha Lachma Anya as two parts of a whole, a type of "show and tell," where the enslavement is depicted through both words and visuals.² Breaking the matzah transforms a whole loaf into "poor man's bread," so that as we recite, "this is the bread of the poor" a visual representation of those words is present on the table.

Development of the custom – It is possible that Yachatz and Ha Lachma Anya even developed together. Neither is mentioned in the Mishnah, and as Ha Lachma Anya is actually composed of 3 distinct units, it has been suggested that the first line was written specifically to be said with Yachatz³ and not as the first part of Maggid. The custom of some to pour the second cup of wine only after Ha Lachma Anya might support this understanding.

Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented? According to this position, the act of breaking the matzah is a means to an end; it is the resulting pieces which provide the Seder participants with the symbols necessary to tell the story.

Displaying vs. Concealing – Two opposing actions are performed with the broken pieces:

• Displaying –  The smaller piece, symbolic of the poverty of the oppression, is displayed as we begin to tell the story.
• Concealing – The second piece (later to be used as the Afikoman) is hidden beneath the tablecloth.  The Ittur and Avudraham point out that this action recalls how the Israelites left Egypt with their dough wrapped in cloth ("מִשְׁאֲרֹתָם צְרֻרֹת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָם עַל שִׁכְמָם"). Shulkhan Arukh HaRav adds that some have the custom of wrapping the matzah in a handkerchief and putting it on their shoulders, further reenacting the Exodus.

From slavery to redemption – Though the displaying of the first piece is the main focus of Yachatz,⁴ (as it is the one which accompanies Ha Lachma Anya),⁵ by combining the act with another that represents the Exodus, Yachatz manages to recount both the enslavement and the redemption.

"Stealing" and hiding the Afikoman – These sources do not mention the custom at all; the only "hiding" of the matzah is its placement under the tablecloth.

"חוטפין מצות" – According to this approach, the practice of "grabbing matzot" to keep the children awake is unrelated to the institution of Yachatz.⁶

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.

Sources:RambanCited in Maharam Chalawa Pesachim 115b, RitvaHaggadah Shel PesachAbout R. Yom Tov b. Ashbel, RanCommentary on Rif Pesachim 25b

Motzi-Matza: whole vs. broken loaves – 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" (Bavli Pesachim 115b-116a) 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.⁷

Why not break the matzah before Motzi-Matzah? 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.⁸ 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,⁹ and thus, the matzah is broken earlier.

Why before Maggid specifically? 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.

Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented? According to this position, the breaking of the matzah is utilitarian in nature, meant to ensure that later in the Seder there will be a broken piece to serve as a symbol of poverty.  It is this piece which is the focus of the custom, while the piece saved for the Afikoman is secondary.¹⁰

Concealing the second piece – According to the Ritva, the piece used for the Afikoman is placed under the tablecloth so as to re-enact the Exodus: "מִשְׁאֲרֹתָם צְרֻרֹת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָם".  This position could have alternatively suggested that the action is not significant and is merely a means of differentiating the two pieces.

Enslavement vs. redemption – According to the Ritva, as above, the two actions done at Yachatz symbolize opposing concepts. The breaking of the matzah to turn it into "poor man's bread" highlights the enslavement, while the concealing of the Afikoman is reminiscent of the Exodus.  This matches the role played by each piece of matzah later in the Seder. Motzi-Matzah requires "לחם עוני", symbolic of the bondage, while the Afikoman represents the Pesach, reminder of the redemption.

"חוטפין מצות" – According to this approach, "חוטפין מצות" is not connected to Yachatz. 

• 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 RanRan's Commentary on Rif Pesachim 23b, following RashbamPesachim 109aAbout R. Shemuel b. Meir, 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.

Sources:Or ZaruaPart II Hilkhot Pesachim 256, perhaps the RoshHilkhot Pesach in BriefAbout R. Asher b. Yechiel,¹¹ Orchot ChayyimSeder Leil HaPesach 12 #3

Which piece of matzah is the focus? This approach uniquely understands that Yachatz focuses only on the hidden piece of matzah, while the one which is returned to the pile as irrelevant.

Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented? The breaking of the matzah contains no symbolic meaning or import of its own.  It is simply a practical measure to ensure that there is enough matzah for the Afikoman.

Hiding the matzah: action or result oriented? This action, too, is result oriented. One hides the piece of matzah reserved for the Afikoman so that it will not be eaten by mistake.¹²  As people did not necessarily have large amounts of matzah, there was a real concern that there would not be sufficient matzah left over to fulfill the mitzvah of Afikoman.

Breaking vs. concealing – According to this approach, both actions are equally important, together providing the means to preserve the Afikoman.

Why is Yachatz before Maggid? Since the whole point of the practice is to ensure that the matzah is not eaten before its proper time, it must be put away before the meal begins, towards the beginning of the Seder.

Enslavement vs. redemption – Yachatz recalls neither the oppression nor the salvation, as it is a totally utilitarian custom.

Hiding and stealing the Afikoman – It is possible that the custom evolved out of this understanding of Yachatz.  If the purpose of Yachatz is merely to preserve the matzah, then having a child grab the matzah, to return it only at Tzafun when the Afikoman is eaten, would seem to accomplish the same goal.  The Rosh's wording that one "gives it to another to guard" already introduces the practice of involving others in the "hiding".¹³

Ploy to Involve the Children

Yachatz is intended to provoke questions from the children participating at the Seder.

Sources:Orchot ChayyimSeder Leil HaPesach 12 #2

Action or result oriented? This approach uniquely understands Yachatz to focus on the dual actions of splitting and concealing, rather than the resulting pieces of matzah.  Though a use is found for the broken pieces, they are not in and of themselves relevant to the custom.

Breaking vs. concealing – It is the combination of these two factors that elicts curiosity from the children.  Upon seeing the matzah broken, the children assume that it will be eaten, only to find it being put away!  With the matzah's concealment, they begin to question.

"חוטפין מצות" – This approach could suggest that this is what R. Eliezer in the Tosefta 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.

Stealing the Afikoman – 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.

Why before Maggid? 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.

Enslavement vs. redemption – 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.

¹ The Ittur notes that a split matzah is required for Motzi-Matzah, but he explains that the matzah is being broken already at Yachatz because it is needed for "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא".

² See the Commentary to the Haggadah attributed to Rashbam and of the Orchot Chayyim, who both similarly view the two customs as a pair, suggesting that Ha Lachma Anya serves as an explanation to Yachatz.  For elaboration of their approach, see Ha Lachma Anya.

³ See Y. Reifman, איגרת ביקורת על סדר ההגדה של פסח, (Jerusalem, 5729): 7-8, 32. This small work collects three previously published articles; the main onediscussed here was originally published in 5602.

⁴ Fundamentally, the other piece need not have had any role to play later in the Seder at all.  The Shulchan Arukh HaRav explains that once it existed, however, a use for it was found. Thus, though any matzah could have been used for the Afikoman, we designate the broken piece for the mitzvah.

⁵ Most of these sources undersatnd that the matzah is required specifically for "הָא לַחְמָא עַנְיָא", since the passage explicitly refers to "poor man's bread".   The Shulchan Arukh HaRav, in contrast, assumes that the broken matzah should be present throughout all of Maggid. He points to the two etymologies of the phrase "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 derives that a broken loaf must be present throughout the recitation of the Haggadah.

⁶ Shulchan Arukh HaRav appears to follow Rashi in understanding that it refers to hastening to begin the Seder so that the children do not fall asleep.  Though he does not explicitly mention the prooftext of "חוטפין מצות" when discussing this, in light of his explanation  "so that the children do not fall asleep" and the similarity to Rashi, it would seem that he is understanding it in this manner.

⁷ 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.

⁸ This is, in fact, the practice followed by the RambamHilkhot Chametz uMatzah 7:3Hilkhot Chametz UMatzah 8:6About R. Moshe b. Maimon (and Yemenites today).

⁹ According to R. Hai Gaon, R. Papa's statement in Bavli Berakhot 39bBerakhot 39bAbout the Bavli 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.

¹⁰ As above, this position would maintain that once the matzah was broken, a ritual use was found for the second piece.

¹¹ Though the Rosh also mentions guarding the piece for later, he is less explicit.

¹² The Rosh writes similarly, "that he should not forget it".

¹³ In fact, illustrations in the Second Nuremberg Haggadah (1450-1500) portray the father handing a child the Afikoman at Yachatz and their giving it back from its hiding place at Tzafun, where the caption reads: אחר יאכלו ישאל האפיקומן/ אשר הנער טמן.