הא לחמא עניא- דף לימוד לליל הסדר

This is the bread of destitution that our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt. Anyone who is famished should come and eat, anyone who is in need should come and partake of the Pesach sacrifice. Now we are here, next year we will be in the land of Israel; this year we are slaves, next year we will be free people.

We remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic.

You shall not eat anything leavened with it; for seven days thereafter you shall eat unleavened bread, bread of distress—for you departed from the land of Egypt hurriedly—so that you may remember the day of your departure from the land of Egypt as long as you live.

Ha Lachma Anya: This is the bread of poverty that our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt. Anyone who is hungry should come and eat, anyone who is in need should come and partake of the Pesach. Now we are here, next year we will be in the land of Israel; this year we are slaves, next year we will be free people.
The source of the Haggadah is the Mekhilta. I have already mentioned in the introductory questions how the opening passage is different from the rest of the text. Why did the Sages compose this passage in Aramaic while the other passages in the Haggadah are in Hebrew? The Sages offered a number of homiletical¹Don Isaac makes a distinction between Midrashic/homiletical explanations and P’shat/literal-contextual explanations. While he does not reject the homiletical explanations, he seems to favor the more literal explanation of the text, whether it be Torah or Midrash. The Haggadah is a work of Midrash which means that the interpretations of the sages of the Maggid may not be the literal meaning of the biblical text. He seeks to figure out, however, what the rabbis had in mind in their interpretation of the text even if it is not the original meaning of the text. Abarbanel begins by offering several homiletical explanations that he rejects as not the true intention of the Maggid/Sages. reasons for this. Among the explanations are the following:
The opening passage was composed in Aramaic so the evil spirits who understand Hebrew would not upset the meal after they were invited (“All who are hungry, come and eat”) to join the meal. There are several reasons to doubt this explanation on a number of different levels. The first is the questionable belief in evil spirits. The second is suggesting that the evil spirits understand Hebrew but not Aramaic. The third is to suggest that anyone can upset the table without the permission of the head of the household, as Scripture states, “A son honors his father and a slave his master.” (Malachi 1:1) Even if one acknowledges the existence of evil spirits, the Sages have already stated that “one who is an emissary in the performance of a commandment is protected from harm,”²Pesachim 8b, and Kiddushin 39b and, “Passover eve is a night of vigilance” (Ex. 12:42) so one is protected from evil spirits.”³Rosh Hashanah 11b
Others suggest that we begin with Aramaic so that the angels cannot join us in praise to the Holy One⁴The notion of not allowing the evil spirits entrance to our Seder and not inviting the angels may sound strange to us. If there is a larger theme to these two interpretations it is that the Passover Seder is a unique moment in which God and Israel come together. It is not to be shared with anyone, not with the angels nor the spirits. This is the moment of our redemption and transformation and only we can sing God’s praises. on the night of the Exodus from Egypt, as Scripture states, “So that one came not near the other all the night.”(Ex 14:20). There are problems with this opinion. It would have been more appropriate to say this regarding Hallel, since they are the songs that are connected to this night.⁵In other words, Hallel should have been recited in Aramaic so that the angels would not begin singing and accompanying the Jewish people when they sang praise to God. The underlying idea here seems to be that the Jewish people should have the privilege of praising God on their own at this time because they were redeemed from slavery. By opening with Aramaic, we “trick” the angels so that they do not realize we are about to praise God. Yet we openly praise God in Hallel in Hebrew. Also, if one prevented them one year after another from singing the angels would become even more jealous. Furthermore, the Sages tell us that angesl understand all the languages. The Sages tell us that Gabriel taught our forefather, Joseph, seventy languages and that the angels received them from the seventy angelic princes⁶Abarbanel will return to this idea many times throughout the commentary. It is belief commonly found in rabbinic literature. Apparently, every nation has its angelic prince that represents its people. To leave Egypt, God had to defeat the angelic prince of Egypt. These princes serve God but also have an element of independence in representing their nation. who surround the Throne of Glory. The angels would certainly have understood Aramaic.⁷Sotah 33a states that the while other angels did not speak Aramaic, Gabriel did.
Others say that because our ancestors were in Babylonia when they composed the Haggadah, they agreed to recite the Haggadah in Aramaic so that the women and children would understand it and also to publicize the commandment. Yet this is problematic because why, then, the rest of the Haggadah in Hebrew? All of it was composed in Babylonia. The passage, Mah Nishtana, in particular, should have been in Aramaic.
It seems more reasonable that the reason for Aramaic is because of the declaration, “All who are hungry come and eat; all who are needy come celebrate the Passover.” The Sages decreed that this passage should be recited in Aramaic. Because they were in Babylonia and not in Jerusalem, they could bring the poor and needy to their table (to join in the Seder).⁸During the temple period one could not invite guests to partake of the Passover offering once Passover arrived. The participants had to be assigned to a particular sacrifice before the Passover offering was sacrificed. They decreed that every householder should increase his gifts to the needy, as stated, “You shall rejoice before the Lord your God, you, your sons, your daughters, and the Levite…” Therefore, when he sat down at the table, the head of the household would raise his voice to the needy who were outside and say in the name of God, “All who are hungry come and eat; all who are needy come celebrate the Passover.” He would invite them to come to his table. Since the needy might not understand him if he spoke Hebrew, they decreed that the declaration should be made in the lingua franca, Aramaic so that everyone would understand and come inside. Thus, the prophet said regarding charity, “It is to share your bread with the hungry, and to take the wretched poor into your home…then your light shall burst forth like dawn and your healing spring up quickly; your protector shall march before you, The Presence of Adonai shall be your rear guard.” (Isaiah 58:7-8)
Why is matzah called lechem oni? There are six explanations, new and ancient, which the Sages have offered to this question. In the tenth chapter of Pesachim we learn, “Samuel said: It is called Leḥem oni because it is bread (lechem) over which one answers (oneh) many questions.” ⁹Pesachim 115b and 31a But this is not a sufficient explanation, for many things are said regarding the bitter herbs and the Passover offering, as in Rabban Gamliel’s statement, “One who has not explained these three things at the Passover Seder has not fulfilled his obligation. They are: the Passover offering, matzah and bitter herbs. Further, Scripture calls matzah, lechem oni even though the Haggadah had not yet been composed.
A second explanation is, “Just as it is the manner of a poor person to eat a piece of bread, for lack of a whole loaf, so too, here he should use a piece of matzah.”¹⁰Pesachim 115b This means that on this night the head of the household must break the matzah in half as a reminder that our ancestors in Egypt were poor. Yet the Torah explains that matzah is a reminder of redemption and not our poverty, as Scripture states, “You shall not eat anything leavened with it; for seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, the bread of distress—for you departed from the land of Egypt hurriedly—so that you may remember the day of your departure from…Egypt...” (Deut. 15:3) There is reason to think, then, that matzah is a symbol of redemption and not slavery or oppression.
The third explanation is related to the second one. Matzah was called lechem oni because of their hard labor in Egypt. The Egyptians did not allow them time to knead their dough and to eat it properly prepared. Actually, the matzah was not a reminder of exile but a reminder of redemption as we have already explained.
Others have say that they made this declaration because they ate matzah with the Passover offering in Egypt, as Scripture states, “They shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.” (Num. 9:11) Matzah was called lechem oni for the Egyptians; when the Israelites partook of unleavened bread, suffering¹¹Matzah was the bread of affliction for the Egyptians. and the plague of the first born came to the Egyptians. That is why we say, “Which our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt.” This also does not make sense to me; it would have been more appropriate to call it the bread of redemption. It also would have been more appropriate to say, “Which our ancestors ate when leaving Egypt,” and not “in the land of Egypt,” which suggests something that happened more regularly.
Others suggest that it was called it “lechem oni,” because of the dough which they decreed should be a tenth of an ephah, like the poor person’s offering (in the temple), “If his means do not suffice for two turtledoves or two pigeons, he shall bring as his offering …a tenth of an ephah¹²An ephah is a measure for grain. The Bible's ephah is about 23 liters, being ten times larger than the omer. The Book of Exodus records that an omer was equal to one tenth of an ephah. of choice flour for a sin offering; he shall not add oil to it or lay frankincense on it, for it is a sin offering.” (Lev. 5:12) This was the same measure as the mana which everyone collected in the wilderness. But it is farfetched to think that this is what the Maggid had in mind. If that was so, then it would have been called, “The dough of the offering,” or “The dough of the needy,” if the amount of dough is why it received this name. It would not have called it, “The bread of affliction” which suggests that it is commenting on the poverty in the character of the bread and its quality.
Finally, the Ramban offers a another explanation in his commentary to Parshat Re’eh (Deut. 16).¹³Ramban, Deuteronomy 16:3 This is what he writes, “the verse mentioned that matzah should be called lechem oni. This is to inform us that God commanded us to eat matzah so that we would remember that the Israelites left Egypt in haste. Also, it is called oni (affliction) as a reminder that our ancestors in Egypt lived on ‘meager bread and scant water.’ (Isaiah 30:20) Thus, lechem oni alludes to two ideas (simultaneously). And so the Sages said, ‘This is the bread of affliction which our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt. Furthermore, the Torah is saying that matzah should be made like ‘poor bread’ and not like ‘rich bread’ as the Sages said…” You see here that the Ramban moved one subject to the next because he had doubts about all the other opinions.
This is what I think: Matzah is called lechem oni for two reasons. First because of its character. Dough, before it becomes leavened, is small in volume, and after it becomes leavened it rises and becomes larger. Without the leavening, matzah does not rise so that it remains lowly and flat. From this perspective it is “the bread of poverty,” – referring to its lowliness and its poorness. And the second reason is: because matzah is hard to digest and remains in the stomach. Therefore, a small amount of matzah is enough for one to eat. This is what Isaac the Israelite wrote in his book, Sefer Misa’adim, “A piece of matzah is hard for the stomach to digest, and it takes a long time to go through the digestive system. As a result it causes gas and constipation. It is more fitting to serve it to laborers than leavened bread. Because of their hatred of the Israelites, the Egyptians served it to Israel so that a small amount of bread would sustain them for a long time when they were working for the king and making bricks.
Thus, “The bread of poverty” is an allusion to the first explanation (because of its physical nature), and “Which our ancestors ate in the land of Egypt,” is an allusion to the second reason for eating matzah. While matzah is called lechem oni, we are not told that we must eat matzah or not eat leavened for other reasons. Rather, we eat it to remember the haste with which the redemption took place, as Scripture states, “for you departed from the land of Egypt hurriedly.” (Deut. 16:3) The opening statement, then, does not contradict the explanation of Rabban Gamliel regarding matzah since the Maggid does not offer a reason why we eat matzah (when he says “this is the bread of affliction,”) but rather he is describing the nature of the food that they ate in Egypt. Later Rabban Gamliel explains the reason we eat matzah on this night….that they left with such haste that there was no time for the dough to rise. This would be the explanation of the verse: “Seven days you shall eat matzah” – which is lowly and flat and not very large – “because you went out in haste from the land of Egypt” so that there was no time for the dough to rise and it remained lowly and poor. I have explained this in my Torah commentary there.
But why did we begin the Haggadah by mentioning matzah and not the Passover offering which precedes it in importance and stature, or by mentioning all three symbols: Pesach, matzah, and maror? What is the meaning regard the expressions “This year…” and why is it repeated? These are questions three and four.
The Sages have already commented that the expression, “All who are hungry…” is meant to be a lamentation over our exile. It is a way of saying that because of our sins we were exiled from our land and we can no longer offer a Passover sacrifice while living outside the land of Israel. Therefore we no longer need to be in a state of purity when we celebrate Passover. Anyone can come and eat our matzah whether they are pure or impure. That is why we pray, next year we should be able to go up to Jerusalem and our children should return to their land. Then the person who is not pure will have to purify himself in order to observe Passover according to the laws of the Pesach offering.
Others explain that we begin the Seder by mentioning matzah because we are obligated to give each person sufficient for his needs at this time. (Deut.15:8) Therefore one says, “All who are hungry…” The statement, “Next year…” is meant to be a way of recalling Jerusalem, as is stated, “That I may place Jerusalem above my greatest joy.” Through the merit of making giving charity to feed the needy, God will redeem us.
Some explain that this statement is meant to be a way of telling the story of what our ancestors did in Egypt on that night of the vigil. On that night they were in such a rush in dividing up the matzah that they said to one another, “’All who are hungry come and eat’ all who are needy participate in the Pesach offering,’ for now we are slaves in Egypt. ‘Next year we will sit together in the land of Israel, free.’” Now as we give out matzah, we make a similar announcement to women and children that this is what our ancestors did in Egypt and that we are following their example. It is the custom to say “Next year may we be free,” in Hebrew and not in Aramaic like the rest of this statement so that the Arameans do not understand us and think that we are rebelling against the government in an effort to become free. This explanation is also not free of problems.
I think that the correct explanation of ha lachma anya has to do with the custom before the reading of the Haggadah, of breaking a matzah and covering half of it with a cloth, and then removing the Passover plate… so that there is reason to ask, “why are we doing this,”¹⁴Pesachim 115b It was decreed that one should invite the poor so they will come to his table and share the food. When they mentioned the matzah, it was not to explain the reason for the commandment or its purpose. This was not the place for this explanation; that would come later on. Rather, it was way of saying, “To those who are in need of matzah and don’t have, come share my matzah for it is the bread of the needy and it is good for you. On this night we are all equal. Do not be embarrassed because you are needy; so were our ancestors in Egypt.” He says this out of humility speaking to the heart of the needy. That is why he calls matzah, bread of poverty. Matzah is a reference to the entire meal since bread can be called meat, just it refers to a pat (a loaf of bread), as stated in Scripture, “Behold I will rain bread from heaven,” (Ex. 16:4). When Moses says to them, “When the Lord shall give you meat to eat in the evening and bread in the morning.” (Ex. 16:8) Regarding both meat and bread, he says, “I will rain bread from heaven.”
By making this declaration, one intends to inspire the women and children to ask questions, “After you have placed the bread before you and you have broken it, and sanctified those who were invited by saying, ‘All who are hungry come and eat,’ why bother to remove the Seder plate from the table?” All of this was meant to inspire a question whose purpose was to lead to the telling of the story of the Exodus from Egypt. From this, one can explain why we begin by first mentioning the matzah; should we begin explaining the meal or by explaining the matzah? We do not mention the Passover offering because there is no offering today outside Israel or maror because we do eat a sufficient amount. Matzah is meant to be a satisfying meal for someone. Similarly, Ezra said, “Go, eat choice foods and drink sweet drinks and send portions to whoever has nothing prepared, for the day is holy to our Lord.” (Nehemiah 8:10)
Since we eat the Afikomen on this night as a reminder of the Passover offering which was consumed at the end of the meal, therefore we say, “All who are hungry come and eat,” for the matzah and the maror, and “All who are in needy come celebrate the Passover” for the Afikomen which symbolizes the Passover offering. We mention it last, as if to say, since one has eaten the meal, now we can have a remembrance of the Passover offering. Also it is possible that the double language is a reference of the different aspects of the meal: “Come and eat” and “Come and celebrate the Passover,” as if to say, “Come celebrate with us.”
Further the saying, “This year, here,” comes to answer a question. If the obligation to celebrate Passover was only observed in Jerusalem, as it is stated, “You are not permitted to slaughter the Passover sacrifice in any of the settlements that the LORD your God is giving you but at the place where the LORD your God will “To establish His name” (Deut. 16:5-6), then how can we say, “Let him come and celebrate the Passover,” as if one was going to make a Passover offering here in the diaspora? To answer this question, we go on to say, “This year we are here; next year in the land of Israel.” One says, “We are now observing Passover in exile, but next year may it be God’s will that we are able to do so in the land of Israel. And then we go on to say, “This year we are slaves here,” meaning, we are observing Passover here because we are enslaved and cannot celebrate in Jerusalem, but next year may we do so in the land of Israel since we will be free and we will be able to observe the laws properly.
The first statement is, “This year we are here, next year in the land of Israel.” This statement is a statement. What is added to it, “This year we are slaves here,” is an explanation for the statement. These statements are not meant to be a prayer as the statement is at the conclusion of the Maggid, “Adonai our God, and God of our ancestors, bring us to other appointed times and holidays.” There, the statement is made as a prayer while here (at the beginning of the Maggid) it is an attempt to answer the question as I have explained. With this I have now answered the questions contained in the first four gates of my commentary.

לחם עני THE BREAD OF AFFLICTION — i.e. bread that calls to mind the affliction to which they were subjected in Egypt (Sifrei Devarim 130:5).

Shmuel said that the phrase: “The bread of affliction [leḥem oni]” (Deuteronomy 16:3) means bread over which one answers [onim] matters, i.e., one recites the Haggadah over matza. That was also taught in a baraita: Leḥem oni is bread over which one answers many matters. Alternatively, in the verse, “leḥem oni” is actually written without a vav, which means a poor person. Just as it is the manner of a poor person to eat a piece of bread, for lack of a whole loaf,