Zichronos book cover Zichronos is in print! Order your copy on Amazon
LIKKUTEI SICHOS: VOLUME 26 - VAERA-PESACH

Likkutei Sichos, Vol. 26: Parshas Vaera / Pesach (Part 1)

The Mordechai's sharp question: if the seder's four cups mirror the four leshonos of geulah, why don't we take four matzos instead?

Part of Likkutei Sichos: Volume 26 - Vaera-Pesach

Works through the Mordechai's classic kushya on why we drink four cups of wine for the four expressions of geulah but eat only three matzos, along with the competing explanation that the four cups instead correspond to the word kos appearing four times by yeshuah. Also covers the two reasons for specifically three matzos at the seder: the need for two whole loaves plus one broken for lechem oni, and a second reading tying the number to the forty loaves of the korban todah, alongside the odd fact that we omit Mizmor L'Todah on Erev Pesach and Pesach itself.

Audio Transcript
The Mordechai's question: why four cups of wine and not four matzos?

Okay, we're starting a new sichah. This sichah has to do with Pesach, even though here, as you see, in 诇拽讜讟讬 砖讬讞讜转 it's under the heading of 驻专砖转 讜讗专讗, but 驻专砖转 讜讗专讗 is connected to Yetzias Mitzrayim, which is an inyan of Pesach. So this is a sichah on Pesach. 讞诇拽 讻\"讜. Okay. 讞讝\"诇 讝讗讙谉, the Chazal say 讗讝 讚讬 讚' 讻讜住讜转 讜讜讗住 讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讛讗讘谉 诪转拽谉 讙注讜讜注谉 爪讜 讟专讬谞拽注谉 讘诇讬诇 驻住讞, the four cups of wine that the 讞讻诪讬诐 were metaken that we have to drink the night of 驻住讞, 讝讬讬谞注谉 讻谞讙讚 讚讬 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛 讜讜讗住 砖讟讬讬注谉 讘转讞讬诇转 驻专砖转谞讜, 讘转讞讬诇转 驻专砖转 讜讗专讗, that it's keneged the four expressions of geulah which are written in the beginning of 驻专砖转 讜讗专讗. The four expressions are 讜讛讜爪讗转讬, 讜讛爪诇转讬, 讜讙讗诇转讬, 讜诇拽讞转讬. The pasuk says that the Aibershter spoke to Moshe Rabbeinu, and He said to him, 讜讗专讗 讗诇 讗讘专讛诐 讗诇 讬爪讞拽 讜讗诇 讬注拽讘, 讜砖诪讬 讛讜讬' 诇讗 谞讜讚注转讬 诇讛诐, I didn't tell them 砖诐 讛讜讬'. Now He says, \"Go to the Yidden, go and speak to the Yidden.\" Yeah, He said, \"Go and speak to the Yidden, and tell them that now came the time 讜讛讜爪讗转讬 - I will take them out of 诪爪专讬诐, 讜讛爪诇转讬 - I will save them, 讜讙讗诇转讬 - I will redeem them, 讜诇拽讞转讬 - I will take them.\" Oh. So since it says these four leshonot of geulah, therefore we drink four cups of wine. 驻专注讙讟 讚注专 Mordechai, so the Mordechai asks, who's the Mordechai? Where do we find the Mordechai? I don't mean where he's buried. Not this Mordechai specifically, where bechalal is the Mordechai printed? It's a sefer called Mordechai, or what is it? It's in the back of the Gemara. Was he a Rishon, or an Acharon, or whatever? Acharon acharon chaviv, huh? You say he was an Acharon? You say he was... One of the one of the two are right. Fregt der Mordechai, so the Mordechai, who was one of the big, big Rishonim, asks a sheilah, and he's known as the Mordechai. You open up the Gemara, any Gemara, you look at the back, after the Nimukei Yosef, or after the Ran, whoever is there, see? Look, what does it say on top here? Mordechai. Just appear in the back. And he's a posek, and he's brought down lehalachah many times. And he's known, his peirush, it's a strange name. His peirush is known by his first name. What was his full name? Can anybody read this? Mordechai ben Rav Hillel Ashkenazi. So the Mordechai asks a sheilah on this din. The question he asks, 诇讘注讬 讗专讘注 诇讞诪讬诐, why is it that because of the four 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛 we have four cups of wine, why shouldn't we have four matzot because of that? 讗讻讬诇转 诪爪讛 讘诇讬诇 驻住讞 讛讜讗 诪谉 讛转讜专讛. The reason we eat matzah on Pesach, Pesach 诪讚讗讜专讬讬转讗, the four cups is only miDerabbanan, this is 诪讚讗讜专讬讬转讗, 讜注诇 砖讜诐 砖谞讙讗诇讜 讗讘讜转讬谞讜 诪诪爪专讬诐. And why do we eat matzah on Pesach, what do we say by the Seder? 诪爪讛 讝讜, 诪爪讛 讝讜 砖讗谞讜 讗讜讻诇讬诐 注诇 砖讜诐 诪讛? Why? 注诇 砖讜诐 砖诇讗 讛住驻讬拽 讘爪拽诐, cause they couldn't rise and therefore they took us out of Mitzrayim, der Eibershter took us out of Mitzrayim. So if so, volt doch mer matzot geven, so it would make more sense, it would fit more, 爪讜 诪转拽谉 讝讬讬谉 诪注谉 讝讗诇 爪讜诐 住讚专 谞注诪注谉 驻讬专 诪爪讜转. It would make more sense that to the Seder we should take four 诪爪讜转 讻谞讙讚 the 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, 讻谞讙讚 the four 诇砖讜谞讜转 of geulah. Because what's connected, what shows more geulah? Matzah! Cuz der Aibershter told us to eat matzah mide'oraita because of the geulah. So if we want to connect something to the four expressions of geulah it should be four matzot rather than four cups of wine. Wine is derabbanan, and wine itself, where do we see by the geulah the inyan of wine? Matzah we see. No, it says in a pasuk when they had 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐, it doesn't say when they went out of Mitzrayim they drank l'chaim. I mean, I imagine they did, but it doesn't say in pasuk that they drank wine when they left Mitzrayim, but they ate matzah when they left Mitzrayim that says, der Aibershter told them to eat matzah. So matzah is much closer to the inyan of 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐. So if we have four lashonot of 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐, it should fit more to the matzah that you should add, the chachamim should have made four matzot. Der Mordechai is mamshich, so the Mordechai continues:

An alternate reason for four cups: tied to the word kos, not the four leshonos of geulah

诇讻讱 讬砖 诪驻专砖讬诐, because of this kushya some people say, 讻谞讙讚 讚' 讻讜住讜转 讛讗诪讜专讬诐 诇讬砖讜注讛, that it's not 讻谞讙讚 the 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛. The Mordechai is saying cuz there is a machloket why we have four cups of wine, so he says, some say it's before the four 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, and I disagree, because if it would be before, because of the four 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, it should have been four matzot. So I'm saying it's not for that reason. The reason we drink four cups of wine because there are four times the word kos which is written in the Torah in connection to yeshuah, in connection to salvation. Like there's one 驻住讜拽, 讻讜住 讬砖讜注讜转 讗砖讗, so we see the pasuk the word kos, and another, there's other pesukim. That's another reason. Says that was, I think he says, the Mordechai is the reason why we drink four cups of wine, which is not so famous. If you ask a kid who learns in school after before Pesach, what did your teacher tell you why do we drink four cups of wine, so the simple answer, which is the most accepted answer is, because of the 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛. Comes the Mordechai, he says if that would be the reason, they would have made it by matzah, not by wine. And mimela he says that that's why it must be a different reason. The 砖讗诇讛 讛讗诪讜专讛 in the is the taam for the 讬砖 诪驻专砖讬诐 he explains that this question that he asked is the reason for those that hold az di az di kosos zenen 讻谞讙讚 讚' 讻讜住讜转 讛讗诪讜专讬诐 诇讬砖讜注讛, that the reason we drink four cups of wine is not, nothing to do with 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, it's because four times kos by 讬砖讜注讛, 讜讜讗住 讚讗住 讗讬讝 谞讬砖讟 砖讬讬讱 讘诇讞诐, and that is not shayach by bread, by the matzah. If the reason for the four cups of wine is because of four kosos of yeshuah, we can't ask a kushya, so let's have four matzos. Why not? Why not shayach? Cuz what? Nu? Because we don't find four times the word bread or the word matzah connected to yeshuah. The word kos we find four times connected to yeshuah, so a kos we drink for the yeshuah. You can't say, well, let's have four matzos, what's four matzos got to do here? So if the reason is because of four 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛 it could be by matzah too, but if it's 讻谞讙讚 讚' 讻讜住讜转 砖诇 讬砖讜注讛 then we have no problem. So the Mordechai says this is the reason for the other opinion. The Rabbi's question is: men darf hobn farentfert di shayle oich far alle meforshim. But the question that he asked has to be answered according to all the opinions, uvifrat loitn taam al pi hadeah Alter Rebbe brengt lehalacha in Shulchan Aruch, certainly that this reason why we drink four cups because of 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛 is brought down lehalacha. It's not just one of the sevarot, lehalacha der Alter Rebbe in Shulchan Aruch brings it, 讗讝 讚讬 讚' 讻讜住讜转 讝注谞注谉 讻谞讙讚 讚讬 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛. So if you do hold like that opinion, we're stuck with the question. What's the question? Why not four matzot? So the Mordechai does not answer the question. The Mordechai farkert says the question is such a good question, that's why we have to learn a different peshat. But according to those that learn that we always know that it's because of the 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, what's taake the reason why do we have four kosot, not four matzah? That's one thing. Okay, it's one sheilah that we have and that's a very logical question. According to all, according to those that hold that the reason for the 讚' kosot is We have to answer this kashya according... 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛 cuz the same reason could apply to matzah, matzah is d'Oraita. Shulchan Aruch, the Alter Rebbe brings that the reason for the 讚壮 for the 讚壮 kosot is 讚壮 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛. So if we accept that, then what's the reason why don't we have four matzot? Then there's another question here. The din is,

Why the seder needs three matzos: two whole loaves and one broken for lechem oni

讚注专 讚讬谉 讗讬讝, 讗讝 爪讜诐 住讚专 讚讗专祝 诪注谉 谞注诪注谉 讚专讬讬 诪爪讜转. We have to take three matzot by the Seder. What's the reason for the three matzot? No, it's not the reason. Not that we have three matzot, one is Kohen, Levi, Yisrael. What's the reason why we have to have three matzot? 讗讬讝 讚注专 讟注诐 讚注专讜讬祝, 讗讜谉 讚注专 讟注诐 讚注专讜讬祝 讗讬讝, the reason for this is, 讜讜讬讬诇 诪注谉 讚讗专祝 讛讗讘谉 爪讜讜讬讬 砖诇诪讜转, 驻住讞 is Yom Tov. Yom Tov, you have to have lechem mishneh. Lechem mishneh means you have to have two whole breads. So in a regular year you have challah, bread. Pesach you can't have bread, so you have matzah. But you have to have two shlemot like every Yom Tov. So you must have two 砖诇诪讜转 诪爪讛 诇讘爪讜注 注诇讬讛诐, to say the hamotzi over them, 讻诪讜 讘砖讗专 讬讜诐 讟讜讘, like every Yom Tov. 讗讜谉 讗 驻专讜住讛 讗讞转 诪砖讜诐 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬. Then we need a third one, and a third one we need a broken one. Why do we need a broken one? Since the pasuk calls the 诪爪讛 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬, what does 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬 mean? Two pshatim, two taytshn, and they're both true. One 驻砖讟 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬, which one, whether bread of the poor, what's the other pshat? That's the same thing. No, no, what's the other 驻砖讟 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬? 砖注讜谞讬诐 注诇讬讜 讚讘专讬诐 讛专讘讛. 注讜谞讬诐 means to answer. It's a bread that on top of the bread we say a lot of things. The bread, the matzah lays on the table during the Seder when we say the Haggadah. So it has to be that we have to say the Haggadah over the matzah. But then there's another taytsh, which the halachah is 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬, poor man's bread. And a poor man usually doesn't have whole pieces of bread or in this case whole matzah. You got to be rich to have a whole matzah, it was a chashuve zach, or whole a whole bread. What does he have? Little pieces. He goes begging. Where does a poor man have bread? Goes around begging. So what do you give him? Leftovers. You got the challah, leftover challah from Shabbos, you give it to him. So a poor man eats a broken piece. Since Pesach night you have to eat the matzah as 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬, so you have to eat davka a broken piece. So you have to have three matzah, two to remain whole and one to break, so then you should be able to have the 诇讞诐 注讜谞讬. That's the reason we have three.

A second reason for three matzos: a remembrance of the korban todah's forty loaves

讗讚注专 讜讜讬 注住 砖讟讬讬讟 讗讬谉 诪专讚讻讬, 谞讗讱 讗 讟注诐, in Mordechai, not in this Mordechai, in a different place in Mordechai gives a different reason: 砖诇砖 诪爪讜转 讝讻专 诇诇讞诪讬 转讜讚讛. It's a zecher to the 诇讞诪讬 转讜讚讛. What does that mean? It's another reason for the three matzah. 诇讞诪讬 转讜讚讛 is, what's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? For what? What's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? Huh? So what's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? 拽专讘谉 砖诇诪讬诐 is a donation to Hashem, 拽专讘谉 谞讚讘讛. What's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? We just learned in the Chitas. 讗诐 注诇 转讜讚讛 讬拽专讬讘谞讜. What's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 before we get to the challot? What's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? Better close the tape. We don't we don't want to be embarrassed if anybody listens to this. What's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? 专讘讜谞讜 砖诇 注讜诇诐, what's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? Korban is a korban, a korban is a sacrifice in English. Speak English, it's a sacrifice. It's a korban, what's a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? Thank Hashem for what? So they bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 every day? 讗专讘注讛 爪专讬讻讬诐 诇讛讜讚讜转. There are four things that if a person does, he must bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 afterwards. One is coming out of jail, crossing the sea, crossing the desert, or being very sick. Oh, so you guys are smart, you know. So you have four things. Then in addition to that, there's many that hold that this is not davka by these four. Any nes that happened to a person, a miracle happened, you bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛. Nowadays that we don't have a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛, what do we do instead? Bentch gomel. Bentch gomel, fine. Very simple. When they brought a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛, in addition to the animal, every korban is an animal, a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 had also challah, 诇讞诐. How many challot? Two, three, four. Three. Two. 40. Who said 40? You brought 40 challot. Were these challot were these 讞诇讜转 诪爪讛 or chametz? Can't bring chametz, only in Shavuos. You can't bring chametz as a 拽专讘谉. One second. Shavuos, you say they had 砖转讬 讛诇讞诐, they had chametz. Well, the 砖转讬 讛诇讞诐 did not go on the 诪讝讘讞, 讻讬 讻诇 砖讗讜专 讜讻诇 讚讘砖 诇讗 转拽讟讬专讜, you're not allowed to. But that didn't go on the 诪讝讘讞. 诇讞诪讬 转讜讚讛 had 30 out of the 40 were matzah and 10 were chametz. But they didn't go on the 诪讝讘讞. It's not like a 拽专讘谉 诪谞讞讛 that the flour actually you were 诪拽专讬讘 on the 诪讝讘讞, then it can't be chametz. But this is something that you brought along with the korban, but it didn't go on the mizbe'ach, you gave it to the kohen. So 30 were 讞诪- matzah and 10 were and 10 were chametz, 10 were chametz. But out of the 40, 30 were matzah. As a zecher to those 30 matzah that we had, bedieved you didn't have to have 40. Four bedieved would be enough. Three matzah and one chametz, you're yotzei, bedieved. That's one pshat, there's more to it, but so this is what the Mordechai says, that since Yetzias Mitzrayim is basically like going out of jail, so the Yidden that were mechuyav in bringing a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛, and when they bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 they would bring the me- minimum, three matzot, four challot, three matzah, one chametz, as a zecher to the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 that they, I don't know if they brought lefo'al a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛, but they would have to bring by going out of Mitzrayim, we also take three matzot. So there's a specific reason why we take three matzot. So here we have two reasons. The main reason is the first one, and he gives in parentheses the other reason. What? Pesach we can't have chametz. So since it's Pesach, we only make a zecher to the matzah, but what can't? But let me ask a shailah and I want somebody to volunteer to answer the shailah. We're saying here that we're making Pesach night a zecher to the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛. On the other hand, Pesach, we do not say 诪讝诪讜专 诇转讜讚讛. Not only we do not say on 驻住讞 诪讝诪讜专 诇转讜讚讛, 注专讘 驻住讞 we don't say 诪讝诪讜专 诇转讜讚讛, even in the morning when you're allowed to eat chametz. What's the reason why we don't say 诪讝诪讜专 诇转讜讚讛 on Pesach or Erev Pesach? Chol Hamoed Pesach we don't say, and erev, why? Because... So you can't have in mind 注专讘 驻住讞 讞诇讜转? But you can't think about chametz on Erev Pesach? They were not allowed to bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 on Pesach. Why? Because it has chametz. They weren't even allowed to bring on Erev Pesach in the morning when you're allowed to have chametz, why? Not because you might, because there comes the hours when you're not allowed to eat chametz anymore. 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 you're allowed to eat, how long can you eat from the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛, how much time when after you bring it? What do we say in siddur everyday? 谞讜, 讛转讜讚讛 讜讗讬诇 谞讝讬专... Yeah, vos shtayt vayter? Here. 讛转讜讚讛. Now, from now on, when you say the word 讛转讜讚讛, you will know what you are talking about. 讛转讜讚讛 讜讗讬诇 谞讝讬专, 拽讚砖讬诐 拽诇讬诐, okay? 谞讗讻诇讬谉 讘讻诇 讛注讬专, 诇讻诇 讗讚诐, 讘讻诇 诪讗讻诇, how long? 诇讬讜诐 讜诇讬诇讛 注讚 讞爪讜转. So when you bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 this morning, you could eat the meat and the challah a whole day today plus into the night. If you're going to bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 on Erev Pesach, you won't be able to, you'll have to finish eating it right away when you can't eat chametz anymore. So you are minimizing in the amount of time when you're allowed to eat the 拽专讘谉. And we don't want that because you might not be able to finish it and you'll come notar. So on Erev Pesach you, even on Erev Pesach you can't bring a 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛. As a- you can't bring, and therefore we don't say 诪讝诪讜专 诇转讜讚讛. In other words, we're we try to stay away from mentioning the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 on Erev Pesach and certainly on Pesach. So why would it be that Pesach night, by the seder, we're doing something as a zecher to the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛? We're taking three matzah, according to the Mordechai's pshat, the reason we're taking three matzah because it's a zecher to the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 which had three matzah. 30 matzah, but bediavad it was three. was enough. Lekhorah a stirah. So who's gonna tell me tomorrow? Bli neder, tomorrow I want to hear from somebody a teirutz to this kushya. S'iz a shtarke kushya. Here we say so much a way that Who didn't have a chance yet to You didn't have a chance? Okay, so it's your turn. Good. So tomorrow keep your ears open, we'll hear the answer to this she'elah. Okay, ober dervayl the Rebbe brings here that the reason why we have three matzot is, or one reason is because we need two for 诇讞诐 诪砖谞讛, two 砖诇诪讜转 and one broken, and the second reason is because of these three.

The Rebbe's chiddush: neither the number three nor four is a side detail

Ulehosif, the Rebbe said I will add, 讗讝 讜讜讬讘讗诇讚 讗讝 讬注讚注专 注谞讬谉 in Torah is bediyuk, since everything in the Torah is exact, 讗讬讝 诪住转讘专 诇讜诪专 讗讝 讗讜讬讱 讚注专 诪住驻专 驻讜谉 讙' matzot, that mistama the reason why we have three 诪爪讜转 讗讬讝 谞讬砖讟 谞讗专 诪爪讚 讗 讝讬讬讟讬拽谉 讟注诐. It's not only for a side reason. So far, why do we need three matzot has nothing to do with the mitzvah of matzah. It just happens to be because we need two 砖诇诪讜转 and one broken one, so if you add up 2 + 1 = 3, that's all, so there's no inyan in three. Same thing di andere de'ah, an inyan in three according to the second peshat, Mordechai, it's not because of an inyan in three, because he wanted to make a zecher to the 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛, and 拽专讘谉 转讜讚讛 had three, so we have three. But there's nothing be'etzem in the 砖讬讬讻讜转 of the mitzvah of matzah to three. But everything in Torah must be exact, so it must be that that's not just for a side reason, 谞讗专 讗讜讬讱 讚讬 诪住驻专 讛讻讜住讜转, 讻讜住讜转, just like by the wine we said the number four has a special meaning, so it must be here that the number three by the matzah is 驻讗专讘讜谞讚谉 诪讬讟'谉 转讜讻谉 驻讜谉 讟注诐 驻讜谉 讗讻讬诇转 诪爪讛 讘讻诇诇. It must be connected to the inyan of 诪爪讛, 讜讜讗住 讗讬讝 讻谞\"诇 注诇 砖讜诐 砖谞讙讗诇讜 讗讘讜转讬谞讜 诪诪爪专讬诐. We said before, why do we eat matzah? Because we went out of Mitzrayim. So there must be some connection between going out of Mitzrayim and number three. We found a reason, a number four for the kosot, which had a problem. Why takeh four on the on the kosot, not on the matzah? But we found a reason for number four for the kosot, and now he says number three has to do, must must have to do with the matzah, even though the simple reason is not that. Al pi zeh komt ois, if we go that way, that direction, comes out 讗讝 讗讬谉 讙讗讜诇转 诪爪专讬诐 讝注谞注谉 驻讗专讗谉 爪讜讜讬讬 注谞讬谞讬诐. In the geulah of Mitzrayim there are two things: 讗讬讬谉 注谞讬谉 讜讜讗住 讘讗砖讟讬讬讟 驻讜谉 讚专讬讬 驻专讟讬诐 讘讻诇诇 this sichah happens to be such an interesting sichah that when you finish the whole sichah, it's like a puzzle. You have so many details, and it all fits into one big, you know, big thing, you know, fits in so good, three and the four and and matzah and the wine and everything, and with many other things. Not every sichah is like, every sichah has good biurim, but it should be pashut technically that you could fit everything in, this is the sichah. So it must be like this: Pesach has one inyan in 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐 which is connected to three, 讜讜讗住 讚注专 注谞讬谉 驻讜谉 讚注专 讙讗讜诇讛 讜讜注专讟 讗讜讬住讙注讚专讬拽讟 讗讬谉 讗讻讬诇转 诪爪讛. Whatever the three represents in the geulah is connected to the mitzvah of matzah. We have no idea what we're talking about, but we know that this is a fact. 讗讜谉 讚注专驻讗专 谞注诪讟 诪注谉 讚专讬讬 诪爪讜转, that's why we take three matzot, not only because of the side reasons. One second. 讗讜谉 讗 爪讜讜讬讬讟注专 注谞讬谉 讜讜讗住 讘讗砖讟讬讬讟 驻讜谉 驻讬专 驻专讟讬诐, then we have another inyan in 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐 which is made up of four, the 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, 讜讜讗住 讻谞讙讚诐 讛讗讟 诪注谉 诪转拽谉 讙注讜讜注谉 讚讬 讚' kosot, and that has to do with the wine. So there's an inyan of four, an inyan of three, this and they're both connected to 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐. 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛 is geulah, is 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐, so it's 讚'. Then you have the 讙' matzot which is three, also 讬爪讬讗转 诪爪专讬诐, and they're both prat and they're both true and they fit specifically to matzah and to wine. What did you say? No? All right. So that the Rebbe says we must say. I'm going to point out haarah 7. In the panim, we said before that there are two reasons why we drink four cups of wine. Some say the reason is because of the 讚' 诇砖讜谞讜转 砖诇 讙讗讜诇讛, and then the second reason, the other reason which the Mordechai holds is because of four kosos of 讬砖讜注讛. So the Rebbe in haarah 7 says, 讜专讗讛 讘讗专讜讻讛 诇拽讜讟讬 砖讬讞讜转 讞诇拽 讬\"讗 注诪讜讚 14 讜讗讬诇讱, look over there, 讜砖诐, there you will see, 砖讬砖 诇讜诪专 砖谞驻拽讗 诪讬谞讛 讙诐 诇讛诇讻讛 讘讬谉 讛讟注诪讬诐. It's not though just a reason, what difference in different reasons, there's a nafka minah lahalachah. What's the nafka minah? 讗讬 讛住讬讘讛 讛讜讬 转谞讗讬 讘砖转讬讬转 讚' 讻讜住讜转, 注讬讬谉 砖诐. Well, the Rebbe says ayen sham means if you read the haarah, and the Rebbe says ayen sham, ayen sham means read there. If you don't look there, you're not listening to the Rebbe. The Rebbe says, \"Look.\" He says, \"专讗讬讛 讘注诇诪讗? Look.\" We don't care. The Rebbe tells you, \"Look,\" so you got to look. So we got to look up, what does it say there? So it says there that it's nafka minah lahalachah if haseibah is a tenai in the 诪爪讜转 讚' kosos. This is a long 讗专讬讻讜转 讛砖讬讞讛, which is also very nigleh, lamdishe, a very lamdishe sichah. It's one of those sichot that you come home and you want to chazer up a lamdishe sichah in the place where you come, especially if there are fremde people, that's a very good sichah to chazer. This sichah is a good kushya in nigleh, but the answer is al pi chassidut. But there it's mamash full nigleh. He has a chakirah there鈥攏ot get to the end yet, but he has a chakirah there鈥攜ou have to drink the 讚' 讻讜住讜转 讘讛住讬讘讛, right? Leaning. And if you didn't lean, what do you have to do? You have to drink it over again. Now, he has a sheilah there: is haseibah a mitzvah by itself, chachamim made a takanah of haseibah, but they said when should you do the haseibah? B'shaat you drink the 讚' 讻讜住讜转 or the matzah. Or there's no din of 讛住讬讘讛, 讞讻诪讬诐 said that the 讻讜住讜转 that you drink should be 讘讛住讬讘讛. So what's, so what happens, so what's nafka mina? If it's, first of all, the nafka mina would be, what happens if you are not in a place where you have where you where where you're able to have wine? Should you do haseibah without wine? So there you could say that well that even if haseibah is a mitzvah for itself, but they said to do it during the time of the wine. But do you takeh have to drink over the cups? Now, you do have to drink over. The sheilah will be like this: listen. So nafka mina lehalachah, the sheilah will be if a person drank the cups without haseibah, what didn't he do? What's lacking now? Is lacking haseibah, or he wasn't mekayem the mitzvah of 讚' 讻讜住讜转? If if if 讚' 讻讜住讜转 have to be drunk 讘讛住讬讘讛, there's a certain condition how you're mekayem the mitzvah of 讚' 讻讜住讜转. You didn't do it right, you got to do it over. If if haseibah is a separate mitzvah, they just said haseibah has to be done 讚' 讻讜住讜转. So what you what So why do you have to do it over? What did you miss? Haseibah. The sheilah will be, can you make a new brachah? Can you make a 讘专讻讛 讗砖专 拽讚砖谞讜 讘诪爪讜转讬讜 讜爪讜谞讜鈥攜ou can't make a brachah on on on drinking 讚' 讻讜住讜转鈥攂ut would be would there be a 讞讬诇讜拽 诪爪讚 讛讚讬谉 of 讚' 讻讜住讜转? But lefoal you got to do it over anyway, whichever way. The nafka mina would be like this. It's an interesting nafka mina. It's what the Rebbe says there. If someone drank 讚' 讻讜住讜转 without haseibah, now, he happens to be by a table where there is no need for haseibah, he's not allowed to do haseibah. 诇诪砖诇, who can't do haseibah? 讘驻谞讬 专讘讜. Should he drink over the 讚' 讻讜住讜转? And he won't do haseibah. Nu, what do you think? He drank without haseibah, now, he knows he has to drink it over, and now he's sitting in front of his Rebbe. So if if he was not mekayem the mitzvah of 讚' 讻讜住讜转, so he has to drink it over. Yeah, but you didn't do the mitzvah of 讚' 讻讜住讜转. Now there's no mitzvah of haseibah, but lefoal you missed out Now you could do it without a haseibah. If it's only a din in haseibah, there's no reason to drink it over, because there's a chiyuv of haseibah. Now there's no chiyuv anymore. Not put you, he happened to be. He first drank 讚' 讻讜住讜转, forgot to make haseibah. Then he heard his Rebbe called him, \"Come here, I need your help.\" So he went over to his Rebbe's house, and now he's sitting there. The Rebbe says, \"I need you here to help me out,\" sitting there. He says to his Rebbe, \"You know, I didn't do haseibah. Do I have to drink over 讚' 讻讜住讜转?\" If he's going to drink over the 讚' 讻讜住讜转, he will not do it with haseibah anyway. Should he drink it over? So, if he missed out the mitzvah of haseibah, should he drink it over? No, he has no 讞讬讜讘 讛住讬讘讛 now. If he missed the mitzvah of 讚' 讻讜住讜转, even though he's not going to do haseibah, but l'foal he didn't mitzvah of 讚' 讻讜住讜转. And now he's not chayav, so he has to do 讚' 讻讜住讜转 without haseibah. But the Rebbe wants to say there could be a chiluk whether which one is a tenai based on these reasons. How is it connected? 注讬讬谉 砖诐. Look it up. In the end he doesn't do it. 讛讗? No, the Rebbe doesn't... Depends which way we learn it. The end is the Rebbe learns that it's both. It's a tenai in the haseibah and haseibah is a tenai in the 讚' 讻讜住讜转. 驻状讜 注状讘 in girsa. Girsa 驻状讜 注状讘. The Rebbe brings there. That you missed out the 讚' 讻讜住讜转, maybe he also shouldn't have to do, just like the one with the other.

NOW PLAYING Choose a shiur to begin Rabbi Yehuda Leib Schapiro
0:00
0:00