בֵּלְשַׁאצַּ֣ר מַלְכָּ֗א עֲבַד֙ לְחֶ֣ם רַ֔ב לְרַבְרְבָנ֖וֹהִי אֲלַ֑ף וְלָקֳבֵ֥ל אַלְפָּ֖א חַמְרָ֥א שָׁתֵֽה׃
Raja Belsyazar mengadakan perjamuan besar bagi seribu orang pembesarnya, dan di hadapan seribu orang itu ia minum anggur.
Ibn Ezra
All the sighing thereof have I made to cease. Some explain, None will be left that should sigh for Babylon; others, All the sighing she has caused, has ceased. I think that the whole passage, from the beginning of this verse7The text has the words מתחלת כל אנחתה, from the beginning of ‘All sighing thereof;’ but if I. E. intended to say, from the words ‘ All sighing thereof,’ he would have said מכל אנחתה, from All the sighing thereof; besides, I. E. says distinctly in giving the context, that the preceding words were also spoken by Belshazzar. The translation is based on the conjecture, that the original copy had the words מתחלת הפסוק from the beginning of the verse, instead of מתחלת כל אנחתה, from the beginning of ‘ All the sighing thereof.’—I. E. seems to have read אַנְחָתָהּ with a Dagesh. till the end of the chapter, is the speech which the prophet put into the mouth of King Belshazzar; for it is well known that the prophet rejoiced in the fall of Babylon; how, then, could he have said, Therefore are my loins filled with pain (ver. 3)? The connection is as follows: the king says, When I heard the cry, ‘ Go up, O Elam ‘—the soldiers used to call out in battle the name of their country—I made all her sighing cease with musical instruments; the vessels of the house of the Lord were brought, and they8The Hebrew text has ושתה, And he drank; but this is probably a part of the speech of Belshazzar, since it is continued even in the next verse, and it explains how Belshazzar made the sighing of Babylon cease; not only by music, but also by drinking, and using for this purpose the holy vessels of the Temple of Jerusalem; instead of ושתה, the plural ושתו is to be read. drank out of them, while Babylon was in siege and distress.9Comp. Dan. 5:1, and 5:30.
Midrash BeChiddush
As the Maggid22Maggid 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 Midrash23Rabbi Foa correctly refers to the Haggadah 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 The word Targum 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,25The liar is none other than Satan. Also Hametz 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….”26This 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.
(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“King Belshazzar gave a great banquet (lechem rav) 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 anya28I am unable to find the source in the Talmud. See Tur Orech Chaim, 486, Beit Yosef Orech Chaim 437 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!”29BT 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״ 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.30Posek 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 pale31Playing on the similarity between Yarak and Horeek 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…”32Pesacim 115b Shmuel said that the phrase: “The bread of affliction [leḥem oni]” (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),”33Job 1:5 Normally we would read the verb yei’aseh 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.34Numbers 11:5 See Rashi’s comment on this verse. 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.35A kal va’chomer is an argument a fortiori, meaning “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.
(Tehilah) First let us consider why this Midrash23Rabbi Foa correctly refers to the Haggadah 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 The word Targum 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,25The liar is none other than Satan. Also Hametz 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….”26This 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.
(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“King Belshazzar gave a great banquet (lechem rav) 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 anya28I am unable to find the source in the Talmud. See Tur Orech Chaim, 486, Beit Yosef Orech Chaim 437 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!”29BT 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״ 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.30Posek 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 pale31Playing on the similarity between Yarak and Horeek 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…”32Pesacim 115b Shmuel said that the phrase: “The bread of affliction [leḥem oni]” (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),”33Job 1:5 Normally we would read the verb yei’aseh 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.34Numbers 11:5 See Rashi’s comment on this verse. 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.35A kal va’chomer is an argument a fortiori, meaning “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.
Rashi
the evening of my desire The night that I longed for, for rejoicing and for a banquet. In the Book of Josipon we find that he was happy since his troops had defeated the army of Persia. (Book 1, ch. 5) That night He made for me into trembling, as it is said (Dan. 5:1): “King Belshazzar made a great feast...They drank wine...(verse 4). On that very night, King Belshazzar was slain...(verse 30).” (6:1) “And Darius the Mede received the kingdom.”
Rashi
partook of a feast Heb. לחם, lit. bread. They made a feast (as in Dan. 5:1) “made a huge feast (לחם).”
Rashi
And surely he, whom wine betrays And surely, when Belshazzar, this one’s grandson, comes; the one whose wine shall betray him for he drank as much wine as a thousand (Dan. 5:1).
Rashi
Eat not the bread: Do not dine. Bread is a term for a meal, as it is written (I Samuel 20:27), "did not come [...] to the bread"; and it is written (Daniel 5:1), "King Belshazzar made a great bread."
Rashi
Drank wine against a thousand: So did Scripture testify about him (Daniel 5:1).
Rashi
my food Heb. לחמי, lit. my bread. All food is called לחם, as in (Dan. 5:1), “made a great feast (לחם).” and as in (Jer. 11:19), “Let us destroy his food (בלחמו) with wood.” which Jonathan renders: poison into his food. Another explanation: They are as the sights of my food. That is to say: I am accustomed to looking at them, at the worms, as I look at my food. This is Mishnaic Hebrew: “and they walk when they look (דוי)” in Tractate Shabbath (53b).