"Ben Zoma said to the Chachomim: `Will we [still]
mention yetzias Mitzrayim when Moshiach comes? Is it
not already written, "Therefore behold, days are coming,
says Hashem, when it will no more be said, `As Hashem lives
that brought up bnei Yisroel from the land of Egypt,'
but `as Hashem lives that brought up bnei Yisroel
from the land of the north and from all the lands into which
he had driven them?' "(Yirmiyohu 16:14). [The
Chachomim] said to him: `Not that yetzias
Mitzrayim will be altogether displaced, but that
shibud malchuyos will be primary, and yetzias
Mitzrayim will be secondary to it' " (Brochos
12b).
According to Ben Zoma, yetzias Mitzrayim will not be
mentioned at all after Moshiach comes. This, however,
creates a difficulty. How can the mentioning of yetzias
Mitzrayim, which is one of the 613 mitzvos, possibly be
annulled?
The Minchas Chinuch (mitzvah 21) writes that the
Rambam and all other commentators who counted the mitzvos
did not include the obligation to mention yetzias
Mitzrayim as a mitzvas asei of the 613 mitzvos.
The reason, he says, is because we rule that the
posuk, "Remember this day on which you came out from
Egypt, out of the house of bondage," (Shemos 12:3)
refers only to Pesach night and is not a mitzvas asei
for the whole year.
The Rambam (Hilchos Chometz uMatzoh 7:1) writes: "The
Torah has given us a mitzvas asei to tell of the
miracles and amazing things that were done to our fathers in
Egypt on the night of 15 Nisan, as the Torah writes,
`Remember this day on which you came out from Egypt.' "
We see that the posuk of "Remember . . ." refers only
to Pesach night. The posuk, "That you may remember
the day when you came out of the land of Egypt all the days
of your life" (Devorim 16:3), from which the
obligation to remember yetzias Mitzrayim during the
whole year is inferred, is not a mitzvas asei. The
posuk means rather that fulfilling the mitzvah of
Pesach will cause you to remember yetzias Mitzrayim
throughout the year. It is a statement of fact and
recommendation rather than a command. Doubtless it is
Hashem's will to remember yetzias Mitzrayim the whole
year, but it is not a special mitzvah of the 613 mitzvos.
The Rambam (Sefer Hamitzvos, mitzvah 157) cites a
Mechilta: "Since it is written `And it shall be, when
your son asks you in the future' (Shemos 13:14), I
might think that it is only if the son asks that you should
tell him. But the posuk, `And you shall relate [the
story] to your son' (ibid., v. 8) teaches us that you
should tell him even if he does not ask you.
"I might think that it is only when one has a son [that he
has to tell about yetzias Mitzrayim]; whence do I
know that he is obligated when he is alone or with others
[than his son]? `And Moshe said to the people, "Remember
this day on which you came out from Egypt.' "
It is thus clear also from the Mechilta that the
posuk "Remember . . ." is a mitzvah on Pesach
night.
HaRav Chaim HaLevi Soloveitchik offers an additional reason
why mentioning yetzias Mitzrayim is not considered
one of the 613 mitzvos. The Rambam rules that we must
mention yetzias Mitzrayim at night, like Ben Zoma,
and therefore he must rule that we do not mention yetzias
Mitzrayim when the Moshiach comes. One ruling is
dependent upon the other -- a word can only teach us one
thing, and if the word "kol" comes to teach us to
include mentioning yetzias Mitzrayim at night, then
we do not have any word in the posuk to teach us an
obligation to mention it after Moshiach comes.
Since the Rambam writes in his Shorshei Hamitzvos
that a mitzvah not in effect after Moshiach comes cannot be
included among the 613 mitzvos, therefore mentioning
yetzias Mitzrayim [which, as we have shown, is not
practiced after Moshiach arrives according to Ben Zoma and
thus also according to the Rambam who paskens like
Ben Zoma] is not one of the 613 mitzvos.
Now the question that we initially asked will be resolved,
for it is Hashem's will that we mention yetzias
Mitzrayim only up until the time of the future
redemption. This has been revealed to us in the
posuk, "That you may remember the day when you came
out of the land of Egypt all the days of your life." But it
is not one of the 613 mitzvos that will never be
annulled.
In this way we can resolve the problem the Minchas
Chinuch had about how Rashi explains the posuk:
"Remember this day on which you came out from Egypt" -- "we
learn from this that yetzias Mitzrayim is to be
mentioned each day." The Minchas Chinuch points out
that it is explicit from the abovementioned Mechilta
cited by the Rambam that, "Remember . . ." refers to Pesach
night and not the mentioning of yetzias Mitzrayim
each day.
There is, however, another Mechilta that apparently
says the opposite of the Mechilta the Rambam quotes.
The Maharal of Prague bases a question about the Rambam on a
Mechilta which reads: "`Remember . . . ' -- I might
think that I know only that we mention yetzias
Mitzrayim during the day; whence do I know that it is
mentioned at night [too]? `That you may remember the day
when you came out of the land of Egypt all the days of your
life.' " It is obvious from this Mechilta that the
posuk "Remember . . ." is referring to the daily
mentioning of yetzias Mitzrayim and not just to
Pesach night.
It seems that the plain meaning of "Remember . . ." is that
it is a mitzvah to mention yetzias Mitzrayim each
day, and Rashi on the Chumash went according to the
plain meaning of the posuk. Nonetheless, since the
novi Yirmiyohu revealed to us that a time will come
"when it will no more be said" (that is, that the obligation
of mentioning yetzias Mitzrayim will be annulled)
and, "That you may remember the day when you came out of the
land of Egypt all the days of your life" comes to include
the nights (as the Mechilta the Maharal cited), we
must conclude that the posuk "Remember . . ." cannot
be a command for daily zechirah, since mitzvos do not
become annulled. The command of "Remember . . ." is hence
only on the Pesach night, just as the Rambam wrote.
The Mechilta the Maharal cited, which maintains that
"Remember . . ." refers to the daily obligation of
remembering, is according to the way we initially understood
it -- according to the posuk's plain meaning.
However, since we infer the obligation of nights from the
word kol, leaving no possibility of including the
times of Moshiach, the mitzvah of "Remember . . ." cannot be
daily, and therefore even the Mechilta (that the
Maharal cites) will conclude that the mitzvah is only on the
Pesach night.
HaRav Yitzchok Hutner zt'l, the rosh
yeshiva of Yeshivas Rabbenu Chaim Berlin in Brooklyn, points
out (Pachad Yitzchok 24) that it seems from the
Maharal that according to the opinion that we do not mention
yetzias Mitzrayim in the osid lovo, we also do
not have to relate yetzias Mitzrayim at length on
Pesach night (sippur yetzias Mitzrayim). However,
according to what HaRav Chaim Soloveitchik wrote (as
mentioned above) this is impossible, since sippur yetzias
Mitzrayim on the Pesach night is surely counted as one
of the 613 mitzvos, and therefore will not be annulled after
Moshiach comes.
There is, though, a need to explain how it is possible that
we do not mention yetzias Mitzrayim the whole year
because of the posuk, "When it will no more be said,
As Hashem lives that brought up bnei Yisroel from the
land of Egypt," but that relating sippur yetzias
Mitzrayim on Pesach night will, nonetheless, not be
annulled. (HaRav Hutner zt'l in Pachad
Yitzchok resolves this excellently.)
HaRav Yosef Brieger, a talmid in our yeshiva,
explained this as follows. Rovo rules (Brochos 54a)
that if someone sees the place where a miracle was done for
him he should make a brocho, "Who made a miracle for
me in this place." Although this person has forgotten about
the miracle, seeing the place where the miracle was done for
him will arouse him to remember and thank Hashem.
This is likewise so with the mentioning of the miracles in
Egypt. Our not needing to mention yetzias Mitzrayim
in the osid lovo means that the daily mentioning will
not be obligatory, but the time of Pesach night itself will
still arouse us to remember Hashem's miracles and will
arouse us to thank Him.
However, according to the Maharal of Prague, after Moshiach
comes there will be no mitzvah of mentioning yetzias
Mitzrayim, nor even the mitzvah of sippur yetzias
Mitzrayim on Pesach night, so the difficulty returns:
how is it possible that the mitzvah of sippur yetzias
Mitzrayim on Pesach night will become annulled?
In order to explain this I will first present what the
Maharal writes about the relationship of redemption from
Mitzrayim to the future redemption.
The opinion of Chachomim, who disagree with Ben Zoma, is
that the mentioning of yetzias Mitzrayim will not be
uprooted altogether when Moshiach arrives, but its memory
will become subordinate to the future redemption. The
obvious difficulty is, why did Chachomim not understand the
novi according to the plain meaning: that yetzias
Mitzrayim will altogether not be mentioned?
The Maharal explains that the redemption of Mitzrayim
is the root of the future redemption. Although the
brilliance and revelation of the Shechina in the
future redemption will be much greater than that of the
redemption from Egypt, to such a degree that we are promised
that the future redemption will be a complete redemption
after which there will be no more goluyos,
nevertheless the brilliance and spiritual abundance revealed
in the redemption of Egypt, and all the spiritual gains and
elevation that we had the zechus to attain then, were
the root and preparation for the future redemption.
"In Nisan we were redeemed and in Nisan we will be redeemed
in the future" (Rosh Hashanah 11a). This means that
the same Divine abundance revealed in Nisan during
yetzias Mitzrayim will again come into effect in the
future redemption. Since yetzias Mitzrayim is the
foundation of the future redemption, how is it possible that
its memory will become annulled when the future redemption
will sprout from it? It is illogical that the cause will
become annulled and only the result will remain.
We can understand this in one of two ways: (1) The
redemption from Egypt was a complete redemption into eternal
freedom, but the future redemption will be even greater. (2)
The redemption from Egypt was only for that time and needed
to be completed by the future redemption -- all of the high
spiritual levels that we gained in yetzias Mitzrayim
were a sort of preparation for the future redemption. The
redemption from Egypt was a beginning and the future
redemption will be the end and completion of that
redemption.
The Beis HaLevi gives many answers to the question of how
bnei Yisroel left Egypt after 210 years when the
decree of oppression by the Egyptians was originally for 400
years. (1) The redemption was actually in the middle of that
time, and the missing time will be completed through other
goluyos. The Mechilta says that Yisroel asked
Moshe Rabbenu how it could be that they were to be redeemed
when only 210 years had passed. Moshe answered that since
Hashem wants to redeem bnei Yisroel He does not care
about the calculation. Hashem "jumps over mountains" and
skips over the calculated end of the golus.
This is so since the nevu'ah was phrased thus: "Know
surely that your seed shall be a stranger in a land that is
not theirs, and shall serve them, and they shall afflict
them four hundred years" (Bereishis 15:13). The
simple meaning is that the slavery and oppression will be
for four hundred years. That time therefore needed to be
completed in another golus. Only through the
attribute of chesed and Divine pity the
nevu'ah of four hundred years was fulfilled by
considering the slavery and oppression together to be four
hundred years, and not slavery alone and oppression
alone.
The redemption of Egypt was through Hashem's mercy and
kindness and was not according to the strict din and
even if we say that the intensity of the oppression
completed the decree, that was only a way of appeasing the
attribute of din, but not the simple meaning of the
decree.
The Vilna Gaon writes (Even Sheleimoh chap. 11) that
whether the future redemption will happen through Hashem's
mercy or according to the din is a difference of
opinion between R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua. According to R'
Eliezer the future redemption will be in Tishrei through the
attribute of din, and R' Yehoshua disagrees and in
his opinion the future redemption will come through the
attribute of mercy. R' Eliezer and R' Yehoshua follow their
school of thought: R' Eliezer maintains that only if Yisroel
do teshuvah on their own will they be redeemed, but
R' Yehoshua differs and claims that there will first be a
Heavenly awakening that will cause them to do
teshuvah.
If the future redemption should be through the attribute of
mercy, as is the opinion of R' Yehoshua, this will not
diminish the redemption of Egypt that was also through His
mercy. The redemption of Egypt was a complete redemption in
itself and not a part of the future redemption, and the
future redemption will be much greater than it.
In R' Eliezer's opinion the future redemption will be
through the attribute of din, and therefore the
redemption of Egypt, which came through the attribute of
mercy -- which we did not actually deserve -- needs to be
completed. The future redemption completes the redemption of
Egypt and the bris bein habesorim that referred to
the redemption of Egypt and alluded to all the
goluyos. The Torah writes about the bris bein
habesorim, "And lo, a horror of great darkness fell upon
him" (Bereishis 15:12), suggesting the four kingdoms
that will oppress the Jews (see the Targum Yonoson).
Rashi commented on the posuk, "And also the nation
whom they shall serve will I judge" (v. 14) that "also"
includes the four kingdoms that are conduits to bring
oppression upon Yisroel. It is logical that if the
golus of Egypt needs to be completed by the other
goluyos, so also the redemption of Egypt will be
completed through the last redemption.
The Maharal of Prague (Gevuros Hashem, ch. 53)
explains the difference of opinion between Ben Zoma and R'
Elazar ben Azarya and Chachomim in the following way: the
Chachomim hold that although the last makkah of Egypt
happened at night we should mention yetzias Mitzrayim
only by day, since the main redemption was by day, and for
the sake of this redemption -- when they left by day -- the
makkah happened on the previous night. Everything was
dependent upon the exodus, which was by day.
Chachomim did not make a drosho from
kol to include the main redemption by day, since the
day was the major redemption anyway.
Ben Zoma and R' Elazar ben Azarya were of the opinion that
since at night HaKodosh Boruch Hu killed the Egyptian
firstborn and Pharaoh told bnei Yisroel to leave,
this was the beginning of the exodus, and therefore it is
logical that kol is intended to include mentioning
yetzias Mitzrayim in the nights.
The Beis HaLevi cites a Midrash (parshas
Bo) which teaches that in olom hazeh Hashem does
miracles at night, because they are temporary miracles, but
in osid lovo He will make miracles by day since they
will be permanent miracles. The Beis HaLevi explains
that golus is compared to night, and therefore when
the redemption occurs in the middle of night it shows that
we are still in the middle of the golus. In the
osid lovo the redemption will be by day -- a sign
that the night and golus have finished.
How did R' Elazar ben Azarya know, asks the Beis
HaLevi, even before he heard the drosho of Ben
Zoma, that we mention yetzias Mitzrayim at night? He
answers, as we wrote before quoting the Maharal, that he
knew it from logic: since the redemption from Egypt was
considered a redemption that happened at night, it makes
sense that we mention yetzias Mitzrayim at night.
R' Elazar ben Azarya is consistent with his other view, that
one can eat the korbon Pesach only until midnight
(Brochos 9a) -- until the time that the Egyptians
hurried to send bnei Yisroel away. The gemora
says that R' Eliezer rules that the korbon Pesach can
be eaten until midnight like R' Elazar ben Azarya, and R'
Yehoshua rules like R' Akiva that one can eat the korbon
Pesach the entire night.
It is possible to say that according to R' Eliezer -- who
believes that the future redemption will be according to the
attribute of din and that the redemption from Egypt
happened through mercy -- the redemption from Egypt was not
a complete redemption and was thus considered a redemption
at night. For this reason we can eat the korbon
Pesach only until midnight, the time of night when Egypt
hurried to send away bnei Yisroel.
Accordingly, Ben Zoma and R' Elazar ben Azarya, who maintain
that we mention yetzias Mitzrayim at night, believe
that yetzias Mitzrayim was a preparation for the
future redemption. Just as the golus of Egypt was
completed through the golus of the four kingdoms, so
too the redemption from Egypt ends with the future
redemption. The novi Yirmiyohu revealed to us that
the redemption from Egypt, which is only the beginning of
the redemption, will not be mentioned any longer. All that
will be mentioned is the completion of the redemption from
Mitzrayim (since all kingdoms are also called
Mitzrayim since they are metzeirim
[oppressors] of Yisroel-Midrash). That is, only the future
redemption will be mentioned.
The mitzvah will not be annulled -- it will only be
enlarged. We will not stop narrating the miracles Hashem
once did for our people, after He finally redeems us with
the great and complete redemption, when we go forth from all
the forms of Mitzrayim. May it happen speedily in our
days, Amen.
