Commentaire de citation sur Les Psaumes 119:165

Another explanation: There are a number of questions concerning the Haggadah's answer to the wise child. First, why doesn’t the Haggadah give the Torah's answer to the wise child: "We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt and Adonai took us out of Egypt with a mighty hand"? (Deut. 6:21)
Second, the wise child's question implies that he wants to clarify the meaning of the verses in the Torah; what is meant by testimonies, statutes and judgments; instead the Haggadah answers with the laws of Passover. How does the reference to the Afikomen answer his question?
Third, when the Haggadah says, "You shall even explain the laws of Passover," it implies that it is actually clarifying the different types of commandments about which the wise child asked: " How is this one law a clarification of all the laws of Passover?
These questions need clarification. Having recited Avadim Hayyinu, "We were slaves to Pharaoh," after Mah Nishtanah, the Torah goes on to say, 'Adonai took us out of Egypt with a strong hand and an outstretched arm.' The verses in Deuteronomy imply that God gave us the Torah so that we could live by its 'testimonies, statutes and judgments.' 'Testimonies, statutes and judgments,' does not apply to Passover alone. If the wise child asks about the 'testimonies, statutes and judgments,' one should not say to him that there is no obligation to clarify such matters since these laws are not necessarily related to Passover. Rather when he asks, the father should answer him by clarifying the laws of Passover which includes at least sixty commandments. Among these commandments are testimonies, statutes and judgments. For instance, the law of the Passover offering is an edut, a testimony; it reminds us that God passed over the houses of the people of Israel. The law 'not to break the bones' of the Passover offering is a khok (khukkim), a statute. And Mishpatim are laws based on reason, such as commandments about how we treat others. The obligation to teach ones fellow Torah is a mishpat. We learn this from the sages: "'The Torah of kindness is upon her tongue.' (Proverbs 31:26) What is the Torah of kindness? When one teaches ones fellow Torah." Further, there is no greater love of one's fellow than teaching him Torah. One increases peace by teaching Torah as it says, For there is great peace for those who love Your Torah." (Psalms 119:165)
One should answer the wise child but one must be cautious in doing so since there are no limits in grasping all of the Torah. The parent should explain to his child the reason for each and every commandment on Passover night. Since he might continue answering his child until daybreak and fail to fulfill the commandments of Pesah, matzah and maror and rejoicing on the festival, (these mitzvot must be performed before midnight) the author of the Haggadah begins by having the father say to the wise child, "Nothing is to be eaten after the Afikomen." By teaching him this law first, the wise child will deduce that one must eat the Afikomen by the assigned time (before midnight). He will be careful not to draw out his question so that they fail to observe the mitzvot. This is what the author of the Haggadah means when he writes, "Even you shall explain…." Teach him all the laws of Passover. From them the wise child will clarify which commandments are "testimonies," "statutes," and "judgments." But, even so, be sure to begin by teaching him "Nothing is to be eaten after the Afikomen" in order that the time of performing the commandments not be missed.
Let Me Explain:
There is no reason to assume that Deuteronomy 6:20 is speaking about a "wise child" or that the question refers to Passover. Typical of the Midrash, the sages took the verse out of context and interpreted it in a unique way. The fact that this "child" asked about three types of commandments: testimonies, statutes and judgments led the sages to assume that this question was posed by perceptive person seeking to understand Torah in its various forms of expressions. The repetition of a question in several places led the sages to assume that there must be some meaning in the questions. In fact, the answer that the Torah gives clearly suggests that this is a question about the observance of the commandments in general and not about Passover: "We were slaves to Pharaoh in Egypt and the Lord freed us from Egypt with a mighty hand. The Lord wrought before our eyes marvelous and destructive signs before our eyes…and he freed us from there….then God commanded us to observe these laws, to revere the Lord our God, for our lasting good, and for our survival as is now the case." (Deut 6:21-25) There is no reason to assume that "these laws" refers to the Passover celebration.
Why answer the wise child's question by calling his attention to the Afikomen? The Afikomen came to replace the Passover offering; that is why it is consumed at the end of the Passover meal. In Deuteronomy verse, the wise child sought to understand the significance of the various laws of the Passover meal. According to Rabbi Bondi, by calling his attention to the Afikomen, we remind him that much as the purpose of the Seder should be to explain the Passover rituals, we are working on a dead line. The Afikomen (today the bit of matzah that is hidden away at the beginning of the Seder) must be eaten before midnight. As important as the learning on this night, we must commit to the ritual time frame of the Seder.
Rabbi Bondi offers a novel interpretation of the words "Ein maftirin achar haAfikomen. He understands the word maftirin as meaning to, "taking leave." He understands this as reassurance to the wise child. In effect, the parent says to the child, "There isn’t enough time to explain all the laws of the Passover right now because we have to finish before midnight. But don’t worry, we'll return to these matters after the meal and we'll explain all the laws later on. Hold on to your questions; we won't take leave of our discussion after the Afikomen - we will continue to explain all the laws of Passover."
One final note about this passage from Rabbi Bondi's commentary. Rabbi Bondi gives an example of an edut - testimony, a law that serves as a historical remembrance, a khok, or a statute which is a law that does not have any type of rational explanation (we observe because it is a divine decree), and a mishpat or a law that can be deduced from reason (natural law) and which usually has something to do with interpersonal relations (such as don’t steal, don’t kill). It is interesting to note that for Rabbi Bondi, study and teaching fall into this category. The study of Torah helps promote peace in the world and it is a source of chesed, kindness and compassion.

a fiery law i.e., the Torah, which had been given among fire and lightning. Sa‘adya Gaon said further that God came on Sinai is an invocation, as if to say: “O, You Who descended upon Sinai, and bequeathed the Torah, may Reuven live etc. ”. But this is all farfetched, because in that case it would have to employ the second person masculine singular imperative, “grant life” and “do not kill”. Those who lack belief have said that Seir denotes the religion of Edom, while Paran denotes the religion of Ishmael. But these people are befuddled. Did they not see that he set out to bless Israel alone? — as it is written, “which Moshe, the man of God, bestowed upon the Children of Israel” [: 1], and then continues with shone to them from Seir . The correct interpretation, in my opinion, is that this section is a general benediction, covering all Israel, followed by the specific blessings for each individual tribe, after which he once again includes them all (in the passage, “Jeshurun, there is none like God” [: 26]). We find elsewhere that Deborah said, “God , when you came forth from Seir, when you marched out of the field of Edom” [Judges 5: 4], where clearly “the field of Edom” does not denote a mountain, although Sa‘adya Gaon claims that our verse describes three mountains that adjoin one another, or that face one another. Also, from the book of Psalms: “God, when You went forth before Your nation, when You marched through the wilderness” [Psalms 68: 8], following which we have “the earth shook” [Psalms 68: 9]; and the abovementioned “march of the Divine Presence through the wilderness” did not occur on the day of the giving of the Torah, for they entered the desert upon leaving the wilderness of Paran. Moreover, Habakkuk said, “God came from Teyman ” [Habakkuk 3: 3] (the latter being one of the descendants of Edom — see “Teyman, Omer, …” [Genesis 36: 11]) meaning the same as “from the field of Edom” [Judges 5: 4]. These verses all speak about wars, as evidenced by “let God arise, let His enemies be scattered” [Psalms 68: 2]. Scripture likens God ’s rescuing of His servants to help “descending” from God , and to the earth trembling, and to mountains melting, and to the heavens clamoring. Further evidence can be found in the song of David: “the earth shook and trembled” [Psalms 18: 8]. I have explained “Sinai itself” [Psalms 68: 9] in its place [comment on Psalms 68: 9], but I shall repeat myself here: “God came” — denotes the entry of the Glory among Israel Sinai was the beginning of that entry. shone from Seir — during all the years that Israel was in the wilderness, God did not display His might among the nations, until Israel came to the field of Edom. From the verse “their Mount Seir, as far as El-Paran” [Genesis 14: 6] we see that Seir was near Paran. Clearly, then, the meaning of our verse is: from the place of Seir (i.e., from the time that Israel arrived at Seir), at that point the Glory shone upon Israel. appeared from Mount Paran — this is a parallelism, repeating the idea that here was the point at which He displayed His splendor.

If you examine carefully the terminology of ‘tzmidim’ [bracelets] and ‘beka’ [half-shekel], you will find that they are opposites, for ‘beka’ is one thing split into two, while ‘two tzmidim’ refers to two separate things that become joined and connected. This alludes to how [Torah’s] commerce is better than the commerce of silver and more desirable, for monetary acquisitions are always split in half, as no person leaves this world with even half his desires fulfilled — if one has a hundred, he desires 200. This is why it’s called ‘mamon’ [money], for the revealed is half of the hidden, as when you write Mem-Mem-Vav-Nun [spelling מָמוֹן]: it hints that if one has 40 zuz, he desires another 40, and so on. However, the acquisition of Torah is entirely bound and connected, increasing peace by joining separate entities, as it is written Great peace have they who love Your Torah (Psalms 119:165). At the time of one’s passing, nothing accompanies a person except Torah and good deeds — and the term ‘accompanying’ implies connection and binding. Thus, money is alluded to in ‘beka’ because one always has only half, while the commandment is represented by ‘two bracelets’ because, on the contrary, one mitzvah draws another complete mitzvah. Money breeds all strife and affliction and separates between brothers, while the Torah’s paths are all peace. Money becomes separated and split from the person and does not accompany him, while the acquisition of Torah accompanies him in all his toil.