Comentários de Citação sobre Deuteronômio 6:23

Rabban Gamliel said: One who doesn’t mention three things on Passover has not fulfilled his obligation. They are pesach, matzah, and maror: All of these things are mentioned in the Mishnah which concludes: “In every generation each person is obligated to see himself as if he personally went forth from Egypt…” Rava adds: He must also say: “And us he freed from there that he might take us…”⁹⁰Deuteronomy 6:23 There are several surprising things about this passage!
The Talmud makes the following statement: In our time we do not eat the matzah and the maror together since matzah is a Torah commandment and maror is a rabbinic commandment – the rabbinic commandment would disqualify the Torah commandment. In the time of the Temple, however, when all three foods were Torah commandments and were consumed together then there was no question since they were all eaten at once. To understand this statement we must return to the earlier discussion regarding why we eat the matzah before the maror. Since the maror symbolizes slavery and the matzah symbolizes freedom, we should have eaten the maror before we ate the matzah. And nowadays when we eat them separately we must wonder why we eat them in the wrong order. This was not a question in the time of the temple since all three could be consumed together in a sandwich. The same question arises regarding Rabban Gamliel’s statement. Why does he say that we should mention pesach, matzah, and maror; maror should have been mentioned before the matzah. In the time of the Temple, while all three were consumed together, the same question could be asked about which should be mentioned first: the matzah or the maror?
The answer to this question can be found in the following statement in the Mishnah: “In every generation one should see himself as if he personally went forth from Egypt…” The Shach⁹¹Rabbi Shabtai Hakohen Katz (1621-1663?) A well known and respected commentator on the Shulchan Aruch on halachic matters comments on the order in this statement by suggesting that it is not talking about the Exodus but about Israel’s future experience: matzah alludes to freedom. When our actions are proper we will be free but if not we will experience maror, bitterness. The Shach suggests that maror here is referring to Israel’s subjugation to the four great kingdoms. That is why maror is mentioned last in the verse. We begin then with matzah – because we are suppose to see ourselves as among those who went out of Egypt and are free. We then receive a warning – if our actions are not proper we will experience bitterness. Even though we are now living in exile and in bitterness, we do not mention this first because we are obligated to see ourselves as one of those who went forth from Egypt, just like the people of the generation of the Exodus.
What does Rava’s statement add to this discussion? We have already seen that for some people, matzah symbolizes slavery since it was the food which slaves eats (it is difficult to digest). If that is the case then matzah and maror are both symbols of slavery. Rava’s statement emphasizes that matzah is a symbol of freedom since ‘God took us out from there.’ When Rava suggests we should also make this statement, he is alluding to the fact that only one fiftieth of the Israelites left Egypt – the rest died because they became impure and worshipped idols. Therefore we say “And US He freed from there.” – We were freed and not the others who died during the plague of darkness.⁹²According to the Midrash, all those Israelites who were unworthy of redemption mysteriously disappeared during the plague of darkness, According to Rabbi Ginzburg, only one out of fifty of the Israelites left Egypt. This number is based on the verse hamushim alu banai, Now the Israelites went up armed. (Exodus 13:18) The word hamushim, armed, is understood here as Hamishim – one fiftieth.

בְּכָל־דּוֹר וָדוֹר חַיָּב “In every generation…” The proof text that is brought here is not really a proof! The Maggid says that, “In every generation one is obligated to see oneself as if one has gone out of Egypt, and that this obligation is even upon us who are living in exile. The Maggid, however, then brings a verse which states, “In order to bring us in, to give us the land which He swore unto our fathers." (Deut. 6:23) as if it had already happened. However it is possible to say that since the people in the land would say, "And He took us out from there,” (Ibid) even though they weren’t the ones taken out (of Egypt), we also can say, “We went out from there…” (even though we weren’t the ones who left Egypt) It is correct to say that if the Holy One had not taken our ancestors out then we, our children and our children’s children would still be subjugated there. That is why we are obligated to see ourselves as if we went forth from Egypt. God’s intention was to bring us out specifically to give us along with the rest of the Jewish people the land that God promised to our ancestors. Therefore, Scripture doesn’t say, “The land which God promised to our ancestors to give us,” since that strengthens only those who were possessing the land at that time. Rather, God said, “In order to bring us in, to give us the land which He swore unto our father,” meaning to them and us at the same time. If we had stayed in the land of Egypt even a little longer it would not have been possible for us to inherit the land because we would have become impure with Egypt.

This is what the Sifri had in mind when its author wrote: "excluding the lands on the East Bank." The Torah in that instance had been careful to write "which the Lord our G'd swore an oath to give to us" (Deut. 6,23). This meant that those lands G'd had sworn to give to us to dwell in. By that wording the Torah meant to exclude other lands which, though promised to us by G'd, were not promised for us to dwell in because these lands did not qualify for the requisite degree of sanctity [necessary for the Israelites to develop their personalities in keeping with Torah imperatives. Ed.]. You will find something similar in the case of Ammon, Moav, and Edom, who are identical respectively with the tribes Keyni, Kenizi, and Kadmoni in G'd's promise to Abraham in Genesis chapter 15. Jeremiah 49,17 foretells of the desolation of the land of Edom. If so, the promise of that land to the Israelites could not have been meant for them to dwell in it. The same fate had been intended for the lands of Sichon and Og. Only the West Bank of the Jordan contained the lands G'd had intended to give to the descendants of the Patriarchs to dwell in. Nonetheless, despite the fact that those lands were not included in the promise to Abraham, the fact that the Israelites conquered them at the command of G'd and that some tribes settled there conferred a certain degree of sanctity on the soil of those lands.