Summary: As the Haggadah continues the telling, Chida draws on concepts from Jewish law and lore to wrestle with the question of how long Israel was enslaved. In Genesis 15:13 God tells Abram, “Know well that your offspring shall be strangers in a land not theirs, and they shall be enslaved and oppressed 400 years.” Elsewhere we are told that they left after 430 years (Ex. 12:40) and the conventional rabbinic calculation is that they were only enslaved 210 years (See Genesis Rabbah 91:2). So which number is correct? Here Chida draws on two notions. First, Israel’s enslavement was atonement for their distant ancestor’s sinful actions as idolaters. And second, that the years of exile had to begin from the time that Jacob and his family descended to Egypt. Jacob’s family was only in Egypt 210 years. That leaves us with the problem of accounting for the additional years decreed in the Covenant of the Pieces. Chida debates whether Abraham and his offspring were judged not as Noahides or as Israelites/Jews. He also draws on the notion of reincarnation to explain why later generations might have to atone for the sins of earlier generations. At first our ancestors were idolaters but now the “One who is present” brought us closer to His service, as it is written: “And Joshua said to the whole people: “Thus said the Lord God of Israel, ‘In days of old your ancestors, even Terah, the father of Abraham and Nahor, dwelled on the other side of the river and worshipped other gods. But I took Abraham your father from beyond the river and I brought him to the Land of Canaan. I increased his offspring and I gave him Isaac. And to Isaac I gave Jacob and Esau. But Jacob and his sons went down to Egypt.” (Josh. 24:2-3) At first our ancestors were idolaters, etc: The Maggid hints at the main reason the Exodus took place before the completion of the 400 years predicted in the Covenant of the Pieces. It is based on the principle that sanctification abrogates a slave’s subjugation.¹ Because of His great love, God sanctified us with the commandments and brought us closer to His service through the pesach offering, matzah and maror and everything pertaining to them. God promised to give us His Torah, as is written in Scripture, “And when you have freed the people from Egypt, you shall worship God at this mountain.” (Ex. 3:12) Thus our bodies and souls were sanctified each day and prepared to grow in holiness. This caused Israel’s premature completion of the subjugation; the sanctification of Israel to God abrogated enslavement. The holiness of the Torah protected them since no one is free except one who studies Torah. Such a person is free from subjugation to the nations since anyone who studies Torah is sanctified. The entire Torah is the name of the Holy One. When engaging in the study of Torah the divine flow from above increases and sanctification cancels subjugation since only one who engages with Torah is truly free. This is the reason Rabbi,² states in Baba Batra, “Suffering comes to the world only due to ignoramuses.” This is how they explained the verse, “I am a wall and my breasts are like towers” (Song 8:10): “I am a wall”; refers to Torah and “And my breasts are like towers; are Torah scholars.”³ The holiness of the Torah is a protective wall that saves people from suffering… this is what the Maggid hints at when it states, “And now God brought us closer to His service.” Being brought closer to God abrogated the remainder of the 400 years so that Israel went forth with a raised hand and was sanctified.

footnotes: ¹ See BT Ketubot 59b, “As Rava said: Consecration, the prohibition of leavened bread on Passover, and the liberation of a slave can all abrogate a lien on property. If property was mortgaged to another person, and then the owner consecrated it, or if leavened bread was mortgaged and Passover arrived and it became prohibited to benefit from it, or if a slave was mortgaged and then liberated by his owner, the lien is abrogated.” Chida gives a different twist to this principle by suggesting when one is santfied he is set free. ² Rabbi is the term commonly used to refer to Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, the Patriarch and editor of the Mishnah. See Baba Batra 8a ³ See BT Baba Batra 7b-8a

We still need to understand why it was necessary to say, “At first our ancestors were idolaters,” and also, why the passage mentions Terah. One of the reasons for the exile in Egypt was to atone for Terah who repented before his death. He lived 205 years. If we take away the first five years, we are left with 200 years. One only becomes self aware at age five so he was punished from that time forth as the Rishonim explain regarding Er and Onan. Even though they were very young (when they sinned) they were punished once they reached the age of five because their intellect was complete even in their youth. The same can be said of Terah; from the age of six onward he had the intellectual capacity and yet he chose to worship idols and make idols. It is also possible that he repented during the last five years of his life when he repented so that 200 years remain. Whichever opinion one accepts, Terah was guilty of worshiping idols for two hundred years. For an Israelite, the sin of idolatry applies to thoughts and practices, as is stated in Kiddushin,⁴ “Thus I will hold the House of Israel to account for their thoughts....” (Ez.14:5) It makes sense, then, that one of the reasons for the Covenant of the Pieces in which God decreed, “Your offspring shall be strangers in a land not their own “ and “they shall be enslaved and oppressed for 400 years,” was to repair the 200 years of Terah's life in which he sinned. Therefore, it was decreed that they be enslaved for 400 years; 200 years for idolatrous thoughts and 200 years for practicing idolatry. If this is correct, then it explains the statement, Ki ger yiheyeh, “For he shall be a stranger;” the gematria of the first letters of these words is the same as aveecha, “your father,” to make known one of the reasons for the exile was to atone for Abraham's father, Terah. This is the reason Job suffered. He advised Pharaoh to act wickedly toward Israel as the Holy Zohar states, the beginning of *Parshat Bo, 33a.*⁵ It is stated there that Job was one of the three advisors of Pharaoh. When Pharaoh rose up to kill the Israelites Job said to him, “Don't do it! Instead take their wealth and rule over their bodies with hard labor. The Holy One said to him, “By your life, for this judgment!” What is written? “Lay Your hand upon all that he has.” (Job 1:11) This is what Elihu said to Job, “For God pays a person according to his actions,” (Job 34:11) See what is written there. This matter is hinted at in the first letter of the verse that is mentioned in the Zohar. Elihu said to Job, “For God pays a person according to his actions.” The word paal⁶ is an abbreviation for Poel eitzot lifaroh, He advised Pharaoh. That judgment and repayment actually came directly from God: God took his wealth and caused Job to suffer.

footnotes: ⁴ BT Kiddushin 39b-40a, “But with regard to that which is written: “So I may take the house of Israel in their own heart” (Ezekiel 14:5), indicates that one can be punished for (idolatrous) thoughts alone….” ⁵ Also See BT Sota 11a ⁶ פעל

This matter makes sense according to what the Kabbalists said. They claimed that Job was the reincarnation of Terah. The sages explained that Abraham deserved to be punished (for his father's sins) but Job suffered instead. This is a surprising statement! First, why did Abraham deserve to be punished since he brought loving kindness to the world, was thrown into the fiery pit in Ur Kasdim to sanctify God’s name, and was tested ten times. Further, if you say that Abraham deserved to suffer, why was the suffering brought upon Job? It is like the proverb: “Shechem got married and Mavgai was circumcised,⁷ 11a; in other words, Abraham received the covenant and Job suffered punishment" The sages explained that Terah committed many sins. That is why his name was Terah; when the letters are switched around they spell ratach, boiled, because he caused the Holy One to boil in anger, as the Holy Zohar states. In order to wash away his sins, it was fitting that suffering should come upon Abraham, to atone for his father. Because God loved Abraham, Terah was reincarnated as Job, and made to suffer. The Ramban⁸ was called Sha'ar HaGemul. (Wikipedia) hinted in essay Sha'ar HaGemul that Job's suffering was for the sins of his soul in a previous life since in the present life Job was not evil. The three comforters who came to see Job could not find a way to explain why Job was suffering since he was a good person. It was Elihu who revealed the secret that the suffering was from a previous life. This allowed Job to be at peace. According to this, one of the reasons for the exile to Egypt was to atone for Terah's sins for 200 years. Job caused Israel's suffering to increase by advising Pharoah and bringing greater suffering on Israel so that the atonement would come sooner. This was all done as a just sentence. That is why, according to the sages, Job remained silent before Pharaoh and was judged with harsh suffering. As a result of his silence the decree of suffering was brought upon him which was more bitter than death. But according to Scripture this was fitting. l

footnotes: ⁷ BT Makot ⁸ Moses ben Nahman (1194–1270), commonly known as Nachmanides or Ramban was a leading medieval Jewish scholar, Sephardic rabbi, philosopher, physician, kabbalist, and biblical commentator. He was raised, studied, and lived for most of his life in Gerona, Catalonia. He is also considered to be an important figure in the re-establishment of the Jewish community in Jerusalem following its destruction by the Crusaders in 1099. The final chapter of his book Torat HaAdam

From this, one might derive what is stated in Zohar Chadash. *"*The prosecutor who wished to prosecute the Exodus from Egypt said, “Have you noticed My servant Job?” (Job 1:8) and then He dealt with Job.⁹ The Ari of blessed memory, wrote that this was hinted at in the song at the Red Sea: “Adonai shatters foes;” (Ex. 15:6) The letters of these words (tiratz oyev) make up the words, “a plague against Job.” (tzaraat oyev) In order to save Israel, God brought this upon Job. l This explanation is surprising. “Why should one person sin and another be punished?”¹⁰ Why should the cup of suffering be visited on Job in order to save Israel? According to what has been explained previously, the exile to Egypt is one of the ways that Israel atoned for the sins of Terah. If so, “the time of the pruning¹¹) has come": The time (zemannan) has come for Israel to be redeemed. The time (zemannah) has come for the foreskin to be cut off (shettizzamer). The time (zeman) has come for Egypt to be cut off (sheyyizzamru). The time (zeman) has come for their idolatry to be torn up.” (Song 2:12) came when Israel went forth from Egypt, and the prosecutor was still accusing Israel! For this reason the Holy One said that the remainder should be visited on Job who was actually the reincarnation of Terah. l

footnotes: ⁹ In other words - God speaks of Job’s righteousness; would he then have punished Job at the time of the Exodus for the sins of Terah? ¹⁰ BT Pesachim 113b ¹¹ See Song of Songs Rabbah 2:12 on the verse “The time of pruning (hazzamir

It is also possible to explain it in this way: when Abraham was circumcised, God said he was now “blameless” (tamim),¹² Walk in My ways and be blameless (Tamim). to inform him that the sins of his father, Terah, would be rectified through Job. The first letters of the statement **"**God appeared to him at Alonei Mamrei, ”¹³ spell “his father."¹⁴ They are also the letters that make up the Hebrew name of Job.¹⁵ They hint that Job was reincarnated from Terah to atone for idolatry with which he rebelled against God. Some time later I came across the book, Zera Barekh.¹⁶ The author writes: the soul of Terah came to be in Job. The gematria of the word Vayera is the same as B’ruach, “Containing the spirit” counting the word.¹⁷ He also writes that Vayera elav Adonai b’elonei mamre contains the letters oyev (enemy) and Iyov (Job), hinting that the soul of Terah, transmigrated into Job. The name of Job is also alluded to in the expression tiratz oyev, “Adonai shatters foes.” This accords with those who interpret, “Abraham came to mourn Sara and bewail her,” (Gen. 23:2) to mean that he had just come from Terah’s burial and that Terah lived until the binding of Isaac. As long as Terah was alive, Abraham faced suffering and trials to atone for his father. When Terah died he no longer faced the suffering because of his father. Terah's soul was transmigrated to Job to complete the rectification. This is alluded to by the word Vayavo, “And he came,” which is made up of the letters aveev, his father, and oyev, enemy. Implying that there was peace for Abraham after the death of his father since Job would now complete the atonement. That is why the final letters of the “Terah died in Haran,”¹⁸ spells nahat, peace. Scripture states, “Abraham was old, advanced in years, and God blessed Abraham with everything,” (Gen. 24:1) because after *Terah’*s death Abraham did not experience sorrow as a result of his father. In the future Terah would be reincarnated as Job.The gematria of the first letters of the words “Old advanced in years God blessed,”¹⁹ has the same gematria as Job. For the sake of his father, Job came, allowing Abraham to live in peace. Later I saw what Rabbi Shapira wrote in, *Megaleh Amukot.*²⁰. See https://www.sefaria.org/Megaleh_Amukot.118?lang=en

footnotes: ¹² See Exodus 17:1 When God made the covenant with Abraham the Torah says: “When Abram was ninety-nine years old, יהוה appeared to Abram and said to him, “I am El Shaddai.*El Shaddai. ¹³ See Genesis 18:1 וַיֵּרָ֤א אֵלָיו֙ יְיְ בְּאֵלֹנֵ֖י מַמְרֵ֑א This is the statement immediately after Abraham has circumcised himself. ¹⁴ אביו ¹⁵ איוב ¹⁶ Possibly a work by Rabbi Menachem Manli, died in 1740 ¹⁷ In HaKollel is a strategy for Gematria in which one counts the word in addition to the numerical value of the letters. ¹⁸ Genesis 11:32 ¹⁹ זקן בא בימים וה' ברך It equals 19. ²⁰ Nathan Nata Spira 1585 – 20 July 1633 was a Polish rabbi and kabbalist, who served as Chief Rabbi of Kraków. A student of Meir Lublin, Spira played an important role in spreading Isaac Luria's teachings throughout Poland. Spira was the author of a number of works, most notably the Megaleh Amukot

The Magid mentions Terah who worshipped idols because this was the primary reason Israel had to atone with 400 years of exile. It was for his idolatrous thoughts and actions that God decreed 400 years of exile at the Covenant of Pieces. Israel did not complete the 400 years because they could no longer delay in Egypt without entering the fiftieth gate of impurity, the decree of punishment fell on Job and he was judged with harsh and terrible suffering. This was the prosecution that the Satan brought since Israel had not completed the years of exile and God was still angry with Job. He brought judgements of vengeance as Scripture states: “Your right hand, Adonai, glorious in power,” (Ex. 15:6) - to save Israel; “Your right hand, Adonai, shatters the foe! (Tiratz oyev)” (Ex. 15:6) which tzaraat Eyov, transposed - a plague against Job. as has been said. From here we find the interpretation in Kol Kitvei.²¹ If I am correct, then fine and if my words are faulty, let them by like the dust of the earth that hardly exists. God in his mercy will forgive my good intentions; God protect me!!

footnotes: ²¹ Chapter 16 of Shabbat; beginning on Page 115a in the Talmud. I am not sure what the author is referring to here.

I will now offer an interpretation of the passages beginning, “But I took Abraham, your father,” “Blessed is the one who keeps his promise,” “And it arose,” “Come and learn,” “He went down to Egypt,,” etc. All these passages can be understood as containing one theme. I will begin by explaining their connection, with the help of God. There is a discussion among the sages regarding an ancient controversy whether the patriarchs were considered to have ceased to be Noahides so that they were already considered complete Israelites whether, for leniency or for strictness? Or were they still considered to be Noahides so that the patriarchs were stricter about Israelite laws where Noahide law was more lenient and stricter about Noahide laws when Israelites laws were more lenient? The great teacher, Rabbi Rosanes,²²) of the Ottoman empire. He took a very active part in condemning and denouncing the Shabbethaians, and he was one of the signers of an appeal to the German communities to oppose the movement. (Wikipedia, Sefaria) in his book Parashat Derachim, delves into this matter. Rabbi Rosanes brings convincing proof based on Rambam that suggests that the patriarchs were judged as Israelites. According to Jewish law an idolater cannot acquire property based on a hazakah, (the right of usucaption).²³ is a legal presumption or usucaption; it establishes a burden of proof. There exist many such presumptions, for example regarding ownership of property, a person's personal status (e.g. whether they are a kohen or Levite), and presumptions about human behavior. Similarly, one might be the presumed owner of land by virtue of having lived on it for three years. This legal concept is sometimes called the usucaption. Abraham established the presumption of ownership by traveling around the land of Canaan and establishing ownership.. How, then, could Abraham acquire land in Canaan by traveling around if he was still a Noahide ? Rather, he was already considered an Israelite. Further, Rabbi Rosanes brings another proof about Abraham’s status. In Masechet Shabbat²⁴ it is stated, “Rabbi Judah said, from where is it taught that Israel is not judged by the constellations (Mazal)²⁵ literally means constellation but is used for luck in popular Hebrew as in Mazal Tov! One's “luck” is determined by the stars - this is true for the other nations but Jews fate is determined by God and by their own actions.? As it is written, “God took him outside…” (Gen. 15:5) Abraham said, “Master of the world: I have consulted my astrologers and have learned that I am not fit to have children!” God said to him: “Leave the astrologers! There are no constellations for Israel!” From this Rabbi Rosanes concludes that Abraham was judged as an Israelite.

footnotes: ²² Rabbi Yehuda Rosanes (1657-1727) was a rabbi in Constantinople. On account of his knowledge of Arabic and Turkish he was appointed by the government as chief rabbi (chakam bashi ²³ In Jewish law, a hazakah ²⁴ BT Shabbat 155a ²⁵ The word mazal

It is possible to reject both of Rabbi Rosanes’ proofs. The first proof is that Abraham acquired the land by traveling about the land as Scripture states, “Up, walk about the land…”²⁶ (Gen. 13:17) I have seen in a letter that our teacher Chaim HaLevi wrote that he was surprised by this because it says in Gittin 38a, “The land of Ammon and Moab became purified through the conquest of Sihon**.”**²⁷ **** If this is so, then it proves that a gentile may acquire property from another gentile through legal presumption. When the Rambam writes that a gentile does not acquire property through legal presumption, it applies to an Israelite - but he can acquire property through usacaption from an Israelite. If this is so then one could argue that Abraham had the status of a Noahide but he chose to be stringent according to the laws of Jews in areas that a Ben Noah was lenient. It would be more advisable to say that he acquired the land of Canaan by traveling about the land according to the law of presumption of one gentile from another - this is the essence of his objection to Rabbi Rosanes in Parshat Dereachim ….²⁸

footnotes: ²⁶ The verse continues “...through its length and its breadth, for I give it to you.” ²⁷ Steinsaltz writes in his translation: “After the conquest of Sihon, the land that had belonged to Ammon and Moab was considered the property of Sihon, and it was permitted for the Jewish people to conquer it although they had not been permitted to conquer the land of Ammon and Moab. In the same manner, a gentile can acquire a slave by taking possession of him as a captive.” ²⁸ He does not include the explanation here . See II Samuel 7:14 I am not certain what this expression adds here.

So too with the second proof that Rabbi Rosanes brings, “When the Holy One says to our forefather Abraham, “Leave your astrologers…”” One might object that Abraham was not to leave the laws and judgements among the Noahide laws, whether lenient and stringent. Rather he was told to follow the stringent Noahide laws. God simply did not want him to follow a matter determined by astrology. When God said, “Leave your astrologers, the Holy One did this out of love for our forefather, Abraham, so that he would not be dependent on the constellations, but for the other matters of Noahide law he was not exempt since the Torah was not given yet. But this objection is not correct. It would appear that the simple meaning of the Talmud is that God said, “Leave the astrologers,” because Israel is not influenced by the constellations and Abraham already had the status of an Israelite.

In his commentary on Parshat Emor, the Ramban sites a proof that the patriarchs²⁹ had the status of Israelites based on what is written in Kiddushin 18a, “Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: ‘By Torah law, a gentile inherits from his father, as it is written: “Because I have given Mount Seir to Esau as an inheritance.’” But perhaps it is different for an apostate Jew?” (Deut. 2:5) Esau is referred to as an apostate Jew because Abraham and his offspring had the status of Israelites. It would appear that Rabbi Rosanes’ proof is good. Even though he states “Maybe based on his status as a gentile he inherits from his father,” there is no doubt that Esau was an apostate Jew. This is what the Rosh³⁰ concludes in his decisions - an apostate inherits from his father - we learn this from Esau who was an apostate Israelite as is stated, “I have given Seir as an inheritance to Esau.” (Deut. 2:5) See the responsa of Rabbi Yosef Mi-Trani,³¹ to Orach Chaim 10.

footnotes: ²⁹ And therefore also Esau had this status. ³⁰ Asher ben Jehiel (1259 – 1327) was a rabbi and Talmudist best known for his abstract of Talmudic law. He is often referred to as Rabbenu Asher, “our Rabbi Asher” or by the acronym for this title, the Rosh. ³¹ Joseph Trani (1568–1639) or Joseph di Trani was a Talmudist of the latter part of the 16th century who lived in Greece. By contemporary scholars he was called Mahrimat, and regarded as one of the foremost Talmudists of his time.

It has been established based on what is stated in Chapter 8 of Masechet Shabbat, that,³² God held the mountain over their heads like a huge vessel… “From this we learn the great caveat to the Torah...." Rabbi Rosanes in Parshat Derachim rejects this this claim³³ by suggesting that, “The law of the land is the law.”³⁴ This would apply if Israel did not acquire the land through a hazakah (the right of usucaption), only then could they be expelled from the land because “the law of the land is the prevailing law.” If, on the other hand, the land was acquired by our forefathers through usucaption (hazakah) then the “the law of the land would not be the prevailing law” (since the land would belong to them by divine right) as has been taught. Joshua wished to see what was in the hearts of the Israelites. If they rejected the mitzvot, their position would be revealed and their righteousness tested, whether they were strong in their faith. And if corruption³⁵ was found in them, one might worry that their true position was not revealed because it would be necessary to expel them from the land, “A land which Adonai your God always looks after,” (Deut. 11:12) and God acquired it for His portion. If they said that they would not worship God, heaven forbid, they would be expelled from the land. Therefore, one would worry that they would hide what was really in their hearts… Thus Scripture states, “I took your father…” to prove that Abraham had the status of an Israelite and he acquired the land through usucaption. This statement has two implications: if they wanted to reject the mitzvot they could do so openly and they would not worry about being expelled from the land since it was their inheritance and the land was presumed to be theirs from the time of their forefathers. Second, through his statement they would understand that Abraham had the status of an Israelite. He wanted to arouse them to faith. Since their identity was from the time of Abraham and they have the status of a Jew from earliest times - even before the giving of the Torah - the patriarchs and their offspring had Israelite status. Therefore, it was appropriate for them to take hold of the Torah of Israel. This was hinted at as an aside; if they aroused themselves to Torah fine, and if, God forbid, they had a complaint in their heart and rejected the commandments, it would still be revealed to them that the Torah was presumed to be theirs. There is a protest and no one could say that the law of the land is the law since the land belonged to them.

footnotes: ³² BT Avodah Zarah 2b, Shabbat 88a, “Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: From here there is a substantial caveat (protest) to the obligation to fulfill the Torah. The Jewish people can claim that they were coerced into accepting the Torah, and it is therefore not binding. Rava said: Even so, they again accepted it willingly in the time of Ahasuerus, as it is written: “The Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them” (Est. 9:27) ³³ That Israel is not obligated to observe the Torah since they were coerced to do so at Sinai. ³⁴ BT Nedarim 28a, Gittin 10b, Baba Kama 113b, Baba Batra 54a ³⁵ See Deut 29:17

We may conclude from this that the patriarchs had the status of Israelites and took possession of the land of Israel through the right of usucaption (hazakah). If so, then Jacob and his offspring were first to go into exile in foreign land, to be subjugated there, in order to fulfill the decree made during the Covenant of the Pieces, for God said, “Your offspring shall be a stranger (ger) in a land not their own.” (Gen. 15:13) This could not be fulfilled in Canaan for it was their land and their heritage.Their settlement there was not considered to be a temporary sojourn (geirut). According to this, the decree of 400 years of slavery did not begin from Isaac as some have said and so Isaac’s birth cannot be included as part of the count. Rather the count begins from when Jacob and his offspring went down to Egypt. If this is so, then we are short the number of years for the completion of 400 years. There are those who answer this problem by suggesting that the Holy One and his retinue went down to Egypt, along with the Shechinah, the Divine Presence, so to speak, and it was through them that the full exile was completed. This applies to the explanation that we have already offered - the intention of Joshua in this matter was to reveal what was in the hearts of the Israelites with regard to the Torah and divine service. He wished to show that Abraham had the status of an Israelite, as did his offspring after him. Abraham acquired the land by traveling about and acquiring it through usucaption. As a result they could reject the yoke of the commandments without worrying about being expelled from the land. This privilege would arouse their desire to serve God. They would see that from the time of our father, Abraham, his offspring had the status of Israelites… This is what the prophet meant when he said, “Thus said Adonai of Hosts, the God of Israel;” he unifies the name with them because they are his people and inheritance. “On the other side of the river… and I took your father, Abraham...” (Josh. 24:2-3) I took him and separated him for Myself by making him a complete Israelite. “I brought him to the land of Canaan;” “I brought him about,” -- exactly. For I said to him, rise up and travel about the land and acquire it through the right of usucaption. One can conclude two things from this: first that Canaan belonged to Abraham through the right of usucaption and was his inheritance. Therefore the principle of “The law of the land is the law,” did not apply to him. Second, the status of Israel applied to our forefathers. The proof for this is mentioned above by the author of Parshat Derachim. One might reject this proof. This is because one can say that a non-Jew can acquire through usucaption from another non-Jew. If so, then the status of Ben Noah would apply to Abraham, as Rabbi Chaim Halevi suggested. Since this is so, a second proof is brought in *Parshat Derachim: “*The blessed Holy One said to Abraham: ‘Leave your astrologers! For Israel is not influenced by the stars.’” “And I increased his offspring.” According to the stars, Israel was not supposed to have offspring. Yet one can say that Abraham had the status of a Noahide and it was only in this situation that God considered giving Abraham the land. Therefore, we have a third proof, that of the Ramban concerning the inheritance of Esau of Mount Seir. Esau was a heretic and yet he still inherited from Isaac. Therefore it states, “And I gave to Isaac….and I gave to Esau Mount Seir as an inheritance. He inherited,” because he was considered a heretical Israelite, and it was from this law that he derived the right of inheritance.

We may now conclude that the land of Israel was acquired through usucaption and that Abraham was considered an Israelite... Based on these facts, one may say that the decree of, “Your offspring shall be strangers in a land not their own,” does not refer to Canaan because Canaan was Israel’s inheritance. Because the Torah says, “In a land not their own” Jacob and his family had to go to Egypt so that the could fulfill the prediction that they would be enslaved “in a land not their own.” The passage from the book of Joshua is quoted in the Haggadah to establish a basis for the story of the Exodus. If they did not desire to serve God, they would freely reveal their will since there would be no forcing them to serve God, and they did not worry about being expelled from the land since “the law of the land is the law” did not apply to them. Since the land of Canaan was an inheritance of our forefathers and it was theirs by right, God would know what was really in their hearts. This was also clear from the beginning since God is referred to as “the God of Israel,” and that God took Abraham, implying that He gave him the status of an Israelite. This was meant to inspire the people to serve God. It is implied and not explicitly stated that they were chosen. Afterwards, Joshua explained their conversation so that they could clarify if they wished to serve God as is implied in other writings in the book of Joshua.

The Maggid prefaced the interpretation of these verses in order to prove that the Covenant of the Pieces did not begin with Isaac since this would suggest that his geirut, his sojourn, began in Canaan, and this land was his inheritance. The land was given by right to their ancestors. Scripture explicitly states, “In a land not their own.” This makes it necessary to explain how the 400 years took place since the Israelites were only in Egypt 210 years. To answer this, the Maggid says, “Blessed in the One who kept his promise.” That is, the Shechinah completed the number of years which were stated to Abraham. If that were not so, the name of Israel would not have been remembered since the people of Israel would have entered the fiftieth gate of impurity from which they could not be purified, God forbid. Thus, the Haggadah goes on to say, “And it is She (V’hee) who sustained us and our ancestors.” Our teacher, the Ari, of blessed memory, V’hee sh’amda is a reference to *Malchut Shamayim, the Sovereignty of Heaven.*³⁶ She, and Malchut Shamayim, the kingship of heaven are both terms used to describe the tenth Sefirah, or the Shechinah. According to our way of understanding, the Shechinah defended and saved Israel in Egypt even before by completing the number of years. She stood up for our ancestors and for us in exile, “not only once….” And the Holy One was with us and saved us from their hand during the days of our going out of Egypt by showing wonders.

footnotes: ³⁶ Hee -

There is an opinion among the sages who say that we learn that evil thoughts join to actions from Esau, as is said, “For the outrage to your brother Jacob…”³⁷ (Obad. 1:10) Also in the Tosafot in the first chapter of Kiddushin (d. 39)³⁸ where we find that Esau had the status of an apostate Jew as is written in Scripture and brought above, “I gave Mount Seir to Esau as an inheritance. If this is so, there is no proof from Esau that evil thoughts of an idolater are joined to their actions since Esau was considered an Israelite, as the verse, “For the outrage to your brother Jacob...” refers to those who destroyed the Temple, as the commentators explain. But it could be that we learn that evil thoughts are joined to action from the deeds of Laban based on the verse, “An Aramian sought to destroy my father.” His were only his thoughts. That is why the Maggid writes, “Go out and see what Laban the Aramean sought to do.” In other words, “Go out from what is taught about Esau. One might have thought that from Esau we learn that evil thoughts are joined to action in the case of idolaters. But we see that Esau was judged as an Israelite - therefore leave this teaching and learn it from Laban. When it says what Laban sought, it means what he thought about doing so. That is why Scripture states, “An Aramean destroyed my father…” From this we must conclude that we learn it from Laban and not from Esau because Esau had the status of a Israelite. How much more so in the case of Abraham who took possession of the land and therefore, his offspring had to become strangers, “in a land not their own.” This was the reason for their descent to Egypt. Since Joseph brought a bad report about his brothers, because he considered them to have the status of Noahides and his father Jacob agreed with him as we shall explain later on. That is why the Maggid writes that they were compelled by Divine decree. Since they thought they were Noahides and that Abraham had not acquired the land by usucaption (since they were actually Noahides) Jacob thought they could be subjugated in the land of Canaan, since it was still “A land not their own.” Therefore they had to be compelled to leave Canaan so that their opinion would be abrogated.

footnotes: ³⁷ Since Esau is called “Your brother,” he must have had the same status as Jacob - that of a Jew/Israelite. ³⁸ I could not find this reference. Rather - the discussion about Esau’s identity seems to appear on Page 18b of Kiddushin.