Avadim Hayyinu: There are a number of question regarding this passage. The Haggadah could have said, “We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt and the Lord freed us from Egypt with a mighty hand.”⁵⁶ Why does the Haggadah add “an outstretched arm” “the Lord our God,” and “from there” to the passage? Why does the Haggadah add, “If God had not taken our ancestors out?” Also, why does it say “we would have been subjugated (mishu’badim),” as opposed to “we would have been slaves (avadim)?” And why does the text mention three generations when it says, “Us, our children, and our children’s children?” There were two forms of oppression in Egypt: there was the oppression of Pharaoh whose heart was hardened and there was the oppression of being trapped in Egypt, which was filled with impurity and sorcery, from which they could not flee. The matzah and the bitter herbs are reminders of these two types of oppression which our ancestors faced in Egypt. The expression “And the Lord our God took us out” is a response to the first and more apparent form of oppression – the oppression of Pharaoh. The second expression, “with an outstretched arm,” is a response to the inner form of oppression which our ancestors faced in Egypt. Israel had already descended close to the fiftieth level of impurity and had they delayed their departure from Egypt even another moment, they never would have been able to escape. That is why God Himself had to redeem them rather than an angel or a messenger. The impurity had weighed them down greatly. This is what scripture says, “Has any god ever ventured to go and to take for himself one nation from the midst of another….”⁵⁷ God did so on God’s own and with His own glory. From there… God brought Israel forth from a place of impurity. With an outstretched arm… This is a reference to the right hand of God which is associated with loving kindness (chesed) as we learn in scripture: “Your right hand, Lord, glorious in power; Your right hand shatters the foe.”⁵⁸ The right hand is mentioned twice in this verse, once for the revealed miracle of redemption and the other for the hidden miracle of redemption.

footnotes: ⁵⁶ Deuteronomy 6:21; Note that the Haggadah adds words which do not appear in Deuteronomy. ⁵⁷ Deuteronomy 4:34 ⁵⁸ Exodus 15:6

**If the Holy One had not brought us out of Egypt…**There is a comment in Yalkut Shimoni ⁵⁹ which claims that Israel could not leave Egypt until Pharaoh said, “I hereby give you permission to leave.” Commenting on this, Rabbi Abraham Gombiner, the author of Zayit Raanan⁶⁰ writes that since Israel had not completed the four hundred years that they were supposed to be in exile, Pharaoh gave them the additional years as a gift. But there is a problem with this explanation. How can the years that Pharaoh gave Israel be considered a valid gift since he gave them under duress? The Talmud says that if one buys a piece of property forcibly from someone, the transaction is not valid. Yet in the same discussion we learn that a divorce can be obtained through physical force because “It is a mitzvah to obey the teachings of the sages.” Giving a divorce is, in the interest of the sages, valid even when done under duress because it is a matter maintaining the will of the rabbis. If obeying the sages’ teachings can be placed on a person forcibly (and against his will), how much more so is that the case when it involves obeying the will of God! We learn from this statement that if God had not pressured Pharaoh, he might not have freed the people of Israel; still this agreement under duress is still a valid gift to Israel! We speak of Israel being subjugated here and not slaves because the people of Israel were liberated from slavery in the month of Tishri, six months before the Exodus. They were no longer slaves but they could not yet leave Egypt so they were still subjugated to Egypt. On Passover the people were freed from subjugation.

footnotes: ⁵⁹ Yalkut Shimoni, 247, 208 The Yalkut Shimoni or simply Yalkut is an aggadic compilation on the books of the Hebrew Bible. From such older haggadot as were accessible to him, the author collected various interpretations and explanations of Biblical passages, and arranged these according to the sequence of those portions of the Bible to which they referred. ⁶⁰ Zayit Raanan is a commentary on Yalkut Shimoni by Abraham Abele Gombiner (c. 1633 – c. 1683), known as the Magen Avraham, born in Gąbin (Gombin), Poland, was a rabbi, Talmudist and a leading religious authority in the Jewish community of Kalish, Poland during the seventeenth century.

Even if we were all wise (chakhamim), all discerning (nivonim), all elders (zikeinim), all knowledgeable in mattes of Torah (Yod’im et HaTorah)… In Rabbi Amram’s version of the Haggadah, the text appears as it does in our text; in Abarbanel’s Haggadah it does not include the word zikeinim. Abarbanel’s version is based on Deuteronomy 1:13 (which does not include zekeinim): “Pick from your tribes men who are wise, discerning and knowledgeable.” So why does our version of the text have four terms instead of three? It is based on the fourfold levels of interpretation of scripture, PaRDeS: Pshat, Remez, Drash and Sod. This fourfold approach to the text is hinted at in the names of the Hebrew alphabet. When one writes out the names of the Hebrew alphabet, these are the only four letters that contain a lamed- aleph gimel dalet lamed. Lamed means learning. Therefore there are four types of ‘learning.’ One is related to the wise person who learns the simple meaning of the text from his teacher. One is for the discerning person who is able to gain meanings from hints (remazim) and allusions. One student of the Torah is called an ‘elder’ (zaken) when one can teach the masses the meaning and teachings of Torah. And one truly becomes knowledgeable in matters of Torah when he understands the hidden meaning of Torah. These four people should not say, “Why do we need to focus on the story of the Exodus – even a child in nursery school knows this story. Rather we should delve into the intricacies of the Passover offering and we will reveal the hidden meanings of the laws of Passover.” To this person, one should say, “Even so it is a commandment upon us to tell the story of the Exodus simply as a story as if we personally went forth from Egypt. It is beloved to tell the story at the proper time.”

It is a commandment to tell the story of the Exodus, and whoever does so at length (v’khol hamarbeh), this is praiseworthy: Why does the Haggadah say, “It is a commandment;” it should have said, “It is an obligation.” Also why does the statement conclude, “Whoever does so at length is praiseworthy” instead of “anyone who tells the story of the Exodus,” or “who lengthens the telling of the story of the Exodus?” It would seem that these questions are related to the whole question of why we don’t recite a blessing over the telling of the story of the Exodus. Scripture states, “You shall tell your child on that day.”⁶¹ The Pri Hadash ⁶² of Moses Galante, and ten years later he was sent to Europe to collect funds for Jerusalem. In 1691 he was in Amsterdam and began the printing of his work P’ri Hadash a commentary on the Yoreh De'ah. suggests that we don’t make a separate blessing because the Kiddush mentions the Exodus and it counts as the blessing for the recitation of the story of the Exodus. But if he has already fulfilled is obligation of mentioning the Exodus by reciting the Kiddush, why is it necessary for him to tell the story at length? It is for this reason that it is necessary to say, “Whoever does so at length is praiseworthy.” Even though he has fulfilled the commandment, on this night we do more than simply mention the Exodus but tell the story at length. Anyone who does so at length (v’khol hamarbeh): implies that we should go to great trouble to encourage children to ask questions, by dipping and doing all types of things that will pique their curiosity. We should also give out ‘parched corn’ and other treats so that they don’t fall asleep and fail to ask questions. Similarly, we should grab the matzah so that the children will stay alert. This is the reason that we hide the afikomen. To do so at length means to do so in different ways so that through these practices they will come to tell the story of the Exodus – and this is truly praiseworthy. **This Is praiseworthy:**Note that the text says, Harai zeh mishubach (This is praiseworthy) and not Harai hu mishbach (It is praiseworthy). The commentators were troubled by this expression – why use the word zeh, this. The use of the word zeh here is related to the use of this word in the following verse, “It is because of this (zeh) that the Lord brought me out of Egypt.”⁶³ This verse is explained in the following way: the word ‘this’ means when the matzah and the maror are before you. Like the numerical value of the word zeh, there are twelve things that should be before us at the Seder: four cups of wine, two dippings, two measures of bitter herbs, matzah, afikomen, karpas, and a measure of matzah for the sandwich.⁶⁴ We begin telling the story when zeh – these twelve items are before us. One who has these twelve things before them is praiseworthy!

footnotes: ⁶¹ Exodus 13:8 ⁶² Hezekiah da Silva (1659-1698) was a Jewish author born at Livorno, son-in-law of the dayan Mordecai Befael Malachi. About 1679 he left his native city for Jerusalem, where he attended the yeshivah ⁶³ Exodus 13:8 ⁶⁴ The measures here are an “olive’s worth,” a common measure used in Halachic literature.