Difference between revisions of "Haggadah:Yachatz/2"
m |
|||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
<point><b>Which piece of matzah is the focus?</b> This approach views the matzah that is returned to the pile (later to be used for Motzi-Matza), and not the one which is saved for the Afikoman, as the focus of the custom.  It is the former which must be present as one begins to recite Maggid, and fundamentally, the other piece need not have had any role to play later in the Seder at all. Nonetheless, once the matzah was broken, the other half is saved so that it can be used for a different mitzvah, the Afikoman.<fn>See Shulchan Arukh haRav who implies this.</fn></point> | <point><b>Which piece of matzah is the focus?</b> This approach views the matzah that is returned to the pile (later to be used for Motzi-Matza), and not the one which is saved for the Afikoman, as the focus of the custom.  It is the former which must be present as one begins to recite Maggid, and fundamentally, the other piece need not have had any role to play later in the Seder at all. Nonetheless, once the matzah was broken, the other half is saved so that it can be used for a different mitzvah, the Afikoman.<fn>See Shulchan Arukh haRav who implies this.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented?</b> According to this position, the act of breaking the matzah has no intrinsic significance and it is merely a means to an end: having a broken piece of matzah on the table while speaking of the Exodus.</point> | <point><b>Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented?</b> According to this position, the act of breaking the matzah has no intrinsic significance and it is merely a means to an end: having a broken piece of matzah on the table while speaking of the Exodus.</point> | ||
− | <point><b>Concealing the matzah: why?</b> The Avudraham (following many other Rishonim), maintains that the piece of matzah to be used as the Afikoman is placed beneath the tablecloth in imitation of the Exodus, when the Israelites left Egypt with their dough wrapped in cloth ("מִשְׁאֲרֹתָם צְרֻרֹת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָם עַל שִׁכְמָם"). | + | <point><b>Concealing the matzah: why?</b> The Avudraham (following many other Rishonim), maintains that the piece of matzah to be used as the Afikoman is placed beneath the tablecloth in imitation of the Exodus, when the Israelites left Egypt with their dough wrapped in cloth ("מִשְׁאֲרֹתָם צְרֻרֹת בְּשִׂמְלֹתָם עַל שִׁכְמָם"). Shulkhan Arukh HaRav points out that some have the further custom of wrapping it in a handkerchief and putting it on their shoulders.</point> |
<point><b>Enslavement vs. redemption</b> – According to this approach, the two parts of Yachatz (breaking and concealing the matzah) might each represent a different aspect of the Israelite experience.  Though Yachatz mainly highlights the poverty of the bondage through the broken matzah, the hiding of the second piece recalls the redemption.<fn>As the Afikoman is meant to represent the Pesach, it is fitting that that piece should recall the Exodus.</fn></point> | <point><b>Enslavement vs. redemption</b> – According to this approach, the two parts of Yachatz (breaking and concealing the matzah) might each represent a different aspect of the Israelite experience.  Though Yachatz mainly highlights the poverty of the bondage through the broken matzah, the hiding of the second piece recalls the redemption.<fn>As the Afikoman is meant to represent the Pesach, it is fitting that that piece should recall the Exodus.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"Stealing" and hiding the Afikoman</b> – These sources do not mention the custom at all; the only "hiding" of the matzah is its placement under the tablecloth.</point> | <point><b>"Stealing" and hiding the Afikoman</b> – These sources do not mention the custom at all; the only "hiding" of the matzah is its placement under the tablecloth.</point> | ||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
<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. </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 | + | <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> | ||
<point><b>Enslavement vs. redemption</b> – 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.</point> | <point><b>Enslavement vs. redemption</b> – 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.</point> | ||
Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
<opinion>Afikoman | <opinion>Afikoman | ||
<p>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.</p> | <p>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.</p> | ||
− | <mekorot><multilink><a href="OrZaruaPartIIHilchotPesachim256" data-aht="source">Or Zarua</a><a href="OrZaruaPartIIHilchotPesachim256" data-aht="source">Part II Hilkhot Pesachim 256</a></multilink>, perhaps the <multilink><a href=" | + | <mekorot><multilink><a href="OrZaruaPartIIHilchotPesachim256" data-aht="source">Or Zarua</a><a href="OrZaruaPartIIHilchotPesachim256" data-aht="source">Part II Hilkhot Pesachim 256</a></multilink>, perhaps the <multilink><a href="RoshPesachimHilkhotPesachinBrief" data-aht="source">Rosh</a><a href="RoshPesachimHilkhotPesachinBrief" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Pesach in Brief</a><a href="R. Asher b. Yechiel (Rosh)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Asher b. Yechiel</a></multilink>,<fn>Though the Rosh also mentions guarding the piece for later, he is less explicit.</fn> <multilink><a href="אורחותחייםחלקאסדרלילהפסחאותיב" data-aht="source">Orchot Chayyim</a><a href="אורחותחייםחלקאסדרלילהפסחאותיב" data-aht="source">Seder Leil HaPesach 12</a></multilink> #3</mekorot> |
− | <point><b> | + | <point><b>Which piece of matzah is the focus?</b> As opposed to the above, this approach focuses on the hidden piece of matzah, rather than that which is returned to the pile to be used for Motzi-Matzah.</point> |
+ | <point><b>Breaking the matzah: action or result oriented?</b> According to this understanding, 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.</point> | ||
+ | <point><b>Hiding the slice - why?</b> 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.<fn>The Rosh writes similarly, "that he should not forget it".</fn>  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.</point> | ||
<point><b>Why before Maggid?</b> 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.</point> | <point><b>Why before Maggid?</b> 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.</point> | ||
<point><b>Hiding and stealing the Afikoman</b> – It is possible that the custom evolved out of this understanding of Yachatz.  If the pourpose of Yachatz is only 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".<fn>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.</fn></point> | <point><b>Hiding and stealing the Afikoman</b> – It is possible that the custom evolved out of this understanding of Yachatz.  If the pourpose of Yachatz is only 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".<fn>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.</fn></point> | ||
− | |||
<point><b>Which matzah is broken and why?</b> The Orchot Chayyim implies that any of the matzot may be broken, but that it should be replaced between the two unbroken matzot, while the Or Zarua states that the middle matzah should be broken, but does not specify to where it is returned.  It is possible that the two do not really disagree and both stipulate that the middle matzah be the broken one so that, later, the full matzah will be on top when it is needed for HaMotzi.<fn>Cf. the discussion above.</fn></point> | <point><b>Which matzah is broken and why?</b> The Orchot Chayyim implies that any of the matzot may be broken, but that it should be replaced between the two unbroken matzot, while the Or Zarua states that the middle matzah should be broken, but does not specify to where it is returned.  It is possible that the two do not really disagree and both stipulate that the middle matzah be the broken one so that, later, the full matzah will be on top when it is needed for HaMotzi.<fn>Cf. the discussion above.</fn></point> | ||
</opinion> | </opinion> |
Version as of 00:08, 21 March 2018
Yachatz
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
The custom of Yachatz has been understood in varying ways. According to one possibility cited by the Or HaChayyim, 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 the splitting of the matzah as more utilitarian in nature. Ramban, thus, maintains that the practice is a necessary preparation 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 significant 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.