As the Maggid²² refers to the central part of the Haggadah which contains the story of the Exodus but here Rabbi Foa uses the term for the speaker who tells the story of the Exodus. begins, he tries to fortify our children during this long exile so that they will believe that the Holy One will redeem us. He explains the reason for the long exile; this is the essence of the Haggadah. The Haggadah contains a record of all the things that happened to our ancestors in Egypt. It records the plagues with which God smote Egypt, and similar acts that God will bring for the future redemption. When we recall these things, we arouse God’s compassion so that we will be redeemed, saying, ‘See how fitting it is that God performed these miracles for Israel! ‘For I have performed these miracles which they continue to mention many years ago and they are not ungrateful.’ To this we say, “Anyone who increases the telling of the Exodus is praiseworthy,” since it arouses God’s great compassion. This is stated in this book; we will mention this later on. But it begins with, “This is the bread of affliction.” (Tehilah) First let us consider why this Midrash²³ as a Midrash both here and in the title of his work, Midrash B’Chidush. The title might be translated “A Midrash with Novel Interpretations. begins in the language of the Targum,²⁴ means translation - but it generally refers to the Aramaic translation of the Bible. (Aramaic) but it doesn’t continue in this language. It is well known that Targum (Aramaic) is the language of Aram, the language of the Ramai, the liar,²⁵ and Se’or, leaven is associated with the demonic, which we remove from our homes. the one who constantly accuses Israel. That is why the sages said that one should not ask for one’s needs in Aramaic; the heavenly angels do not understand the language of “the Aramean who sought to destroy my father.” (Deut. 26:5) Despite this, the sages decreed that we give Satan his portion, by reciting certain prayers in Aramaic, such as the Kaddish and the Kedushah D’Sidra so that Satan will not prosecute us. In this way he will feel that he is glorified and consider himself important because we recited certain prayers in his language. Now (on Passover) when he (Satan) is expelled from our homes, as God commanded us, “No leaven shall be found in your houses,” (Ex. 12:19) and, “For all leaven (s’or) and leavening (hametz).” These are also names for Satan, who is also called the evil inclination. There is no question that he is meticulous in this matter. Therefore, we make a point that a portion of our prayers be given to him like the goat that is sent to Azazel (on Yom Kippur). This is similar to the proverb which the sages said, “When a dog barks in the king’s house, the king says, ‘Throw him a bone,” so he won’t disturb the meal. That is why we begin the Seder in the Aramaic language so that Satan will not disturb our meal. (V’hitchilu) We begin with this statement (in Aramaic) so that Satan will hear that we are still subjugated, in exile, and he will not look unfavorably on our festivities. We say to him, if we actually had left Egypt would we still be eating the bread of affliction as we did there? And if Satan wishes to join our meal, we invite him to do so. That is why we say, “All who are hungry, let him come and eat,” fulfilling the words of Scriptures, “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat,” (Prov. 25:21) He is also invited so that we don’t forget the destruction of our Temple and our place of beauty, thereby fulfilling the statement, “If I have not placed Jerusalem above my greatest joy.” (Ps. 137:6) This is according to the version of the Sefaradim, Rambam, and Abudraham, “Now we are here, slaves….”²⁶ (Ulam) However, it is not clear what Ha lachma anya, “This is the bread of affliction,” means. If it refers to the type of bread our ancestors ate in Egypt, then it should be, “This is like (k’ha) the bread of affliction,” the version in some Ashkenazic Haggadot. But even this version is problematic. For our ancestors in Egypt did not eat matzah like ours. Scripture testifies that when they left Egypt they had matzah because they had been expelled and could not tarry. Therefore the bread they ate in Egypt was still called lechem oni, the bread of oppression, because they ate while they were being oppressed and subjugated. According to this, it should have said, “The bread which our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt is the bread of affliction.” Also, why should this bread be considered worse than any other type of affliction? To this, we answer that since the recitation of the Seder is set before the meal, we call the matzah, lechem oni so that we would not fall asleep, preventing telling the story as we should and keeping us awake. (Akh) The word lachma, here, does not mean “bread” (lechem) but rather “meal,” as is said, “A great banquet (lechem rav)”²⁷ for his thousand nobles, and in the presence of the thousand he drank wine.” (Dan. 5:1) This is also demonstrated by our actions. We recite this expression as we lift up the plate containing the matzah, the vegetables and the other items. This is also implied by the statement in the Gemara, “One must remove the table and afterwards one says, Ha lachma anya²⁸ in order to encourage children to ask questions. Similarly, when Abaye was a youngster in the house of Rabbah, his teacher, he asked, “Since we have not yet eaten, why are we taking the table away?” Rabbah then answered, “You have exempted us from reciting the Mah Nishtanah!”²⁹ This implies that lachma anya is the meal that our ancestors ate in Egypt: that is, meager bread, greens and not much more. They built habitations of clay and bricks - that is why we place haroset on the Seder plate according to the Talmud and the poskim.³⁰ is the term in Jewish law for "decider" - a legal scholar who decides the Halacha in cases of law where previous authorities are inconclusive. The decision of a posek is called a p’sak din or p’sak halacha ("ruling of Jewish law") or simply a "p’sak". There is also a cooked or roasted shankbone, a reminder of the festive and Passover sacrifices. Thus the only items in the meal are things that a needy person would have: bread that has not risen and is meager and scanty like the bread the poor would eat in small amounts, greens that would leave their faces pale³¹ andHoreek from oppression, and haroset which is a reminder of the clay. There are also some things to eat and to feed others: wine in plenty since even the needy in Israel should not have less than four cups of wine and all the regular items - meat, fish and all types of tasty things that they can imagine rich people having. In this way we can also say, “All who are hungry come and eat…” The reason we don’t say “This is like the bread of affliction,” is because it is well known that things are never like the thing it is supposed to resemble. And we say this is the bread of affliction in order to make clear that this meal is not worse than the meal that our ancestors ate in Egypt. By way of a midrashic and allegorical explanation, the opening expression comes to describe the way things are and to comfort our children in exile since we were not redeemed in the present month of Nisan as we expected. And making us aware that in a future month of Nisan we are destined to be redeemed, when the time comes, with God’s help. (V’hitchil) One begins with this text in order to fulfill what the sages stated: a person is obligated to give thanks (livarekh) for the bad as well as the good. One acknowledges and offers praise to the Master of All for exiling us from our land, for had we not been exiled, we never would have been able to give thanks to God for anything! As the sages said, “The first Temple was only destroyed because the people did not recite blessings for Torah, or other blessings. It seems obvious that this was the reason for the destruction of the first Temple, for the blessings were only decreed in the time of Ezra and his Beit Din. The second return then was not a redemption but a return. The reason for the destruction of the second temple was that the people gossiped, just as people do today. That is why we say, Ha lachma anya, as the sages explained it, “This is the bread about which we say many things…”³²]” (Deut. 16:3) means bread over which one answers [onim] matters, i.e., one recites the Haggadah over matzah. That was also taught in a baraita: Leḥem oni is bread over which one answers many matters. Our ancestors in Egypt ate it without a blessing, is implied by the statement, “All who are hungry come and eat, all who are needy come partake of the Passover offering.” This implies that at that time there was such great hunger that they would come and immediately jump into the meal. The word yeitei, “come,” should be read as present tense, as in, “This is what Job always does (yei’aseh),”³³ as future tense - Rabbi Foa suggests here we should read it in the present tense as I have chosen to translate. Similarly, he reads Yeitei as They are coming - immediately and not a future verb. Also, in the verse, “At such times as the cloud rests (yihiyeh) over the Tabernacle for but a few days,” (Nu. 9:30) and in other such verses. Similarly, the verse, “We remember the fish we ate for free in Egypt;” implies, it was free from heavenly command.³⁴ But what commandment was associated with the eating of fish? It is the commandment to recite a blessing which they did not do! Now, however, before we eat matzah, we recite seven blessings. That is why, after saying “as we did in Egypt,” we pray for our redemption. It is as if we are making a kal va’chomer.³⁵ “from the stronger case.” For example, one may make the following logical reasoning and support it using the basis of this rule: If, as a given, a parent will punish his or her child should the latter return home with scuffed shoes, surely the parent will punish his or her child should the latter return home with scuffed shoes, ripped pants and a torn shirt. The reasoning is based on pure logic: if the parent is so upset about one item of clothing, surely he or she will be at least that upset about the child's entire ensemble. List of Talmudic principles - Wikipedia If while the Israelites were in Egypt, they did not recite blessing on the food they ate so they did not recognize God’s loving kindness, and yet they were still redeemed, we, who recite blessing (every day), how much more so do we deserve to be redeemed! Therefore, may it be God’s will that what we eat this year in slavery, we may eat next year in the land of Israel as free people who did not withhold blessing God in holiness and purity.

footnotes: ²² Maggid ²³ Rabbi Foa correctly refers to the Haggadah ²⁴ The word Targum ²⁵ The liar is none other than Satan. Also Hametz ²⁶ This is different from the Ashkenazic version which separates the two statements from one another. A - Now we are here; next year in the land of Israel. Now we are slaves; next year we will be free. S - Now we are here; next year in the land of Israel. Now we are here as slaves; next year in the land of Israel as free people. ²⁷ “King Belshazzar gave a great banquet (lechem rav) ²⁸ I am unable to find the source in the Talmud. See Tur Orech Chaim, 486, Beit Yosef Orech Chaim 437 ²⁹ BT Pesachim 115b Note the source is in Aramaic and not Hebrew: אַבָּיֵי הֲוָה יָתֵיב קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבָּה, חֲזָא דְּקָא מַדְלִי תַּכָּא מִקַּמֵּיהּ, אֲמַר לְהוּ: עֲדַיִין לָא קָא אָכְלִינַן, אָתוּ קָא מְעַקְּרִי תַּכָּא מִיקַּמַּן?! אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבָּה: פְּטַרְתַּן מִלּוֹמַר ״מָה נִּשְׁתַּנָּה״ ³⁰ Posek ³¹ Playing on the similarity between Yarak ³² Pesacim 115b Shmuel said that the phrase: “The bread of affliction [leḥem oni ³³ Job 1:5 Normally we would read the verb yei’aseh ³⁴ Numbers 11:5 See Rashi’s comment on this verse. ³⁵ A kal va’chomer is an argument a fortiori, meaning