Bostoner Torah Insights: Bostoner ‘Chassidus’ in Hebrew & English: Parshas Tzav (Pesach) – 14-21 Nissan 5785
Bostoner Torah Insights - Yerushalayim
Bostoner Torah Insights
Bostoner ‘Chassidus’ in English
Parshas Tzav (Pesach) – 14-21 Nissan 5785
Bostoner Rebbe shlit”a – Yerushalayim
Secretariat Email: bosto...@gmail.com
»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
Before Moshe even comes to Mitzrayim, Hashem informs him that Bnei Yisroel is the firstborn of Hashem (Shemos 4:22) בני בכורי ישראל, which is followed by a statement to tell Paro that if he does not release Bnei Yisroel, Hashem will strike the firstborn of the Egyptians measure for measure. Hashem reveals to Moshe the plague of Makas Bechoros at this point, but none of the other plagues, which seems oddly out of place.
The Meshech Chachma on (Shemos 5:17) explains by the plague of Arov ערוב it says והפליתי ביום ההוא את ארץ גשן אשר עמי עמד עליה לבלתי היות שם ערב למען תדע כי אני יהוה בקרב הארץ (8:18). He points out that even though the general rule is that a destroying angel is given permission to destroy indiscriminately, without differentiating between the wicked and non-wicked, for this plague this will be suspended by the need to protect Goshen.
Let’s quckly jump to Makkas Bechoros, where we expound in the Haggadah that Hashem himself carried out Makkas Bechoros. If so, why was there a need for blood on the doorposts to differentiate between the Jewish and non-Jewish homes. Doesn’t Hashem know which homes fulfilled the Mitzvah of Korban Pesach
The Chasam Sofer explains that Hashem only killed a firstborn from the father (but not the mother) which only Hashem could possibly know. The destroying angel was allowed to kill the firstborn from the mother, because that fact is revealed to all at birth. Accordingly, the blood on the doorposts was only for the destroying angel who killed the firstborn from the mother. This is the reason why Pidyon HaBen only applies to firstborn son of the mother and not to firstborn son of the father, since the Chasam Sofer says there was only a miracle regarding the firstborn from the mothers who were saved from the destroying angel.
However, the aforementioned Meshech Chachma on the plague of Arov would seem to be at odds with this Chassam Sofer, because it would seem that according to the Chasam Sofer, the general rule of a destroying angel killing indiscriminately was also suspended for Makat Bechoros. It would seem the destroying angel entered the home of the Jews with blood on the doorposts, but was prevented from killing any Jewish firstborns which he could discern, which is limited to only firstborns of mothers. However, in the Jewish homes that had Egyptians or Jews who did not partake of Korban Pesach, who were firstborns, the destroying angel was allowed to kill them.
After learning the Meshech Chachma and Chasam Sofer, the question came to mind why Maakas Bechoros is considered a greater act of intervention than Arov, if in both cases the destroying angel was restrained from his normal activity of killing indiscriminately. After some research, I also found the very same question asked by Rabbi Cooperman in his footnotes to one edition of the Meshech Chachma
He suggests in the name of the Ramban (Shemos 13:15) that the ten Maakos can be subdivided into three sets of three Maakos, and then Maakas Bechoros in a category by itself. The Ramban explains that the first set of Makkos was to answer Paro’s question מי ה' לא ידעתי את ה by showing that Hashem exists, most notably after the plague of Kinim lice, the Egyptian magicians told Paro אצבע אלקים היא admitting the existence of Hashem The second group of three Maakos was to prove to Paro ולכן יאמר הכתוב במופתים למען תדע כי אני ה' בקרב הארץ, that there is divine providence. That the world is not a place of random chaos, but that Hashem actively maintains the world in a personal and direct manner and can punish the wicked and reward the righteous. Finally, the third set of Maakos was to prove כי אין כמוני בכל הארץ that there is no power or force in the universe greater than Hashem.
Rabbi Cooperman explains that since Arov is part of this middle section, which proves Hashgacha Pratis, he suggests that that Hashem wanted to show Hashgacha Pratis more profoundly in Makas Arov, since that was its purpose to show Hashgacha Pratis. However, Maakos Bechoros is a separate entity, which the Ramban states was specifically to free the Jews and nothing to do with the first nine Maakos, which were proving these three concepts to Paro. Thus the Hashgacha Pratis that did or did not happened in Makas Bechoros was ancillary to the main objective of the final plague.
This is why Hashem told Moshe from the beginning, that Paro will not send out the Jews until Makas Bechoros. For the first several Maakos, Paro could harden his own heart and didn’t send out the Jews, but when Paro was willing to send the Jews out in the later Makkos, Hashem had to harden Paro’s heart, in order to keep the Jews in Mitzrayim, to bring the remaining plagues that were necessary as per the Ramban. Hashem revealed to Moshe from the beginning that the plan was to climax with Maakas Bechoros and if Paro was being obstinate about releasing the Jewish People it was all part of the master plan and Moshe should not be discouraged if the process of Yetziyas Mitzrayim was not immediate.
Wishing everyone a Chag Kosher v’Samayach. L’Shana HaBa B’Yerushalayim HaBenuyah