Midrash su Deuteronomio 16:3

“Judah was exiled due to affliction and great enslavement. She settled among the nations, did not find rest; all her pursuers have overtaken her within the straits” (Lamentations 1:3).
“Judah was exiled.” Are the nations of the world not exiled? Rather, even though they are exiled, their exile is not exile. The nations of the world who eat of their bread and drink of their wine, their exile is not exile.⁸³They assimilate into their new surroundings, symbolized by the fact that they consume the bread and wine of the people in their new surroundings. Consequently, they do not experience exile as acutely as Jews experience it. Israel, who do not eat of their bread and do not drink of their wine, their exile is exile. The nations of the world, who walk in their garments,⁸⁴They adopt the mode of dress of their new surroundings. their exile is not exile, but Israel, who walk barefoot, their exile is exile. That is why it is stated: “Judah was exiled.” Here it is stated: “Judah was exiled [galeta],” and there it is stated: “Judah was exiled [vayegal] from upon its land” (Jeremiah 52:27),⁸⁵The verse in Jeremiah uses the feminine form while the verse in Lamentations uses the masculine form. for once they were exiled, their power waned like a female. That is why it is stated: “Judah was exiled [galeta].”
“Due to affliction [me’oni],” it is because they ate leavened bread on Passover, just as it says: “You shall not eat with it leavened bread; seven days you shall eat with it unleavened bread, the bread of affliction [oni]” (Deuteronomy 16:3). Alternatively, “due to affliction [me’oni],” because they took the collateral of a poor man [ani] into their homes, just as it says: “If he is a poor man, you shall not sleep with his collateral” (Deuteronomy 24:12). Alternatively, “due to affliction [me’oni],” because they withheld the wages of hired laborers, just as it says: “You shall not exploit a poor [ani] or indigent hired laborer” (Deuteronomy 24:14). Alternatively, “due to affliction [me’oni],” because they stole the gifts of the poor, just as you say: “You shall leave them for the poor [ani] and the stranger” (Leviticus 19:10, 23:22). Alternatively, “due to affliction [me’oni],” because they ate the tithe of the poor; Rabbi Beivai and Rabbi Huna [said] in the name of Rav: One who eats produce from which the tithe of the poor was not taken is liable to receive the death penalty. Alternatively, “due to affliction [me’oni],” because they engaged in idol worship, just as it says: “It is a sound of crying [anot] that I hear” (Exodus 32:18).⁸⁶Moses said this when he heard the sound of the people worshipping the Golden Calf. Rabbi Aḥa said: It is the sound of lauding idol worship that I hear.⁸⁷This is Rabbi Aḥa’s explanation of the phrase from Exodus 32:18. Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Yosei: There is no generation that does not receive [punishment] due to the sin of the Calf.

(Exodus 13:3) "And Moses said to the people: Remember this day when you went out of Egypt, etc." I know only that the exodus from Egypt is mentioned in the daytime. Whence do I derive (the same for) the evenings? From (Devarim 16:3) "… so that you remember the day of your going out of Egypt all the days of your life": "the days of your life" — the days; "all the days of your life" — (to include) the nights, as per Ben Zoma. The sages say: "the days of your life" — in this world; "all the days of your life" — to include the days of the Messiah. Ben Zoma said to them: Israel is destined not to mention the exodus from Egypt in time to come, it being written (Jeremiah 23:7-8) "Therefore, behold, days are coming, says the L rd, when it will no more be said: 'As the L rd lives, who brought up the children of Israel from the land of Egypt, but as the L rd lives, who brought up and who brought the seed of the house of Israel from the land of the north.'" R. Nathan says: "who brought up and who brought": The exodus from Egypt is mentioned in time to come. And whence is it derived that we say "Blessed are You, O L rd our G d, and the G d of our fathers, the G d of Abraham, the G d of Isaac, and the G d of Jacob"? From (Exodus 3:15) "and G d said further to Moses: Thus shall you say to the children of Israel: The L rd, the G d of your fathers, the G d of Abraham, the G d of Isaac, and the G d of Jacob, sent me to you." And whence is grace over meals derived? From (Devarim 8:10) "and you shall eat and you shall be sated" — this is the first blessing. "for the land" — this is the second blessing. "the good" — this is "who builds Jerusalem," viz. (Ibid. 3:25) "the good land … and the Levanon." "that he gave you" — who gave all good to us (this is the blessing of "hatov vehametiv"). R. Chiyya b. Nachmani said in the name of R. Yishmael: It is already written (Ibid. 8:10) "and you shall eat and you shall be sated, etc." What would be lacking if it were not written "that He gave to you"? (It is written to signify that you must thank Him) both for His measure of good and for His measure of punishment. This tells me that a blessing is required after eating. Whence do I derive that it is required (also) before eating? R. Yishmael says: It follows a fortiori, viz.: If one who has eaten to satiety requires a blessing, how much more so, one who is hungry! R. Nathan says: It is written (I Samuel 9:13) "As soon as you enter the town, you will find him before he ascends the mount to eat; for the people will not eat until he comes, for he will first bless the offering, etc." R. Yitzchak says: It is written (Exodus 23:25) "And you shall serve the L rd your G d, and He will bless your bread and your water." When is it "your bread"? Before you have eaten it. This tells me only of food as requiring a blessing before it and after it. Whence do I derive (the same for) Torah? R. Yishmael says: It follows a fortiori, viz.: If food, which is only temporal, requires a blessing before and after it, how much more so Torah, which is eternal! R. Yehudah b. Betheira says: It is written (Devarim 8:10) "and you shall eat and you shall be sated and you shall bless … for the good land." What is lacking that "good" supplies? This ("good") is Torah, as it is written (Mishlei 4:2) "for a taking of 'good' have I given to you." R. Chanina, the son of the brother of R. Yehoshua says: It is written (Devarim 32:3) "When I call upon the name of the L rd" — the blesser; "give grandeur to our G d" — the answerers. And what do they answer? "Blessed is the L rd who is blessed forever." And when he mentions His name, they respond "Blessed is the name of the glory of His kingdom forever." And thus did David say (Psalms 34:4) "Exalt the L rd with me, and let us extol His name forever." Rebbi says (Mishlei 10:7) "the remembrance of the Tzaddik is for blessing": When he mentions the Tzaddik, "the Life of the worlds" — (Psalms 145:17) "the L rd is a tzaddik in all of His ways — let it be for blessing "Amen!"

(Exodus 13:3) "and chametz shall not be eaten": (The intent of the verse is) to equate the feeder (of chametz to minors) with the eater. __ But perhaps (the intent is) to forbid derivation of benefit from it? From (Devarim 16:3) "You shall not eat chametz upon it" we learn that benefit may be derived from it. How, then, am I to understand "chametz shall not be eaten"? To equate the feeder with the eater. These are the words of R. Yoshiyah. R. Yitzchak says: It is not needed (for this derivation). If with sheratzim, (creeping things), the less stringent, the feeder is equated with the eater, how much more so with chametz, the more stringent! How, then, am I to understand "chametz shall not be eaten"? To forbid derivation of benefit from it.