חמרא וריחני פקחין

Pointing to scientific discoveries and saying "See, just like it says in Chazal!" is risky. But here's an interesting development. 

Horyos 13b

חמשה דברים משיבים את הלימוד פת פחמין וכל שכן פחמין עצמן והאוכל ביצה מגולגלת בלא מלח והרגיל בשמן זית והרגיל ביין ובשמים והשותה מים של שיורי עיסה ויש אומרים אף הטובל אצבעו במלח ואוכל הרגיל בשמן זית מסייע ליה לרבי יוחנן דאמר רבי יוחנן כשם שהזית משכח לימוד של שבעים שנה כך שמן זית משיב לימוד של שבעים שנה: והרגיל ביין ובשמים:  מסייע ליה לרבא דאמר רבא חמרא וריחני פקחין:

The Gemara recommends five things for retention of knowledge. Of the five, two are stated in the singular, as one one-time actions, which indicates to me that they function as segulos, and three are recommended for regular use, which implies, to me, that their efficacy is biology based, not magical. The three are שמן זית יין ובשמים.

Olive oil, wine, and fragrance. Rava offered his positive personal experience in regard to two - Rava said that wine and fragrance enhanced his wisdom. (I have written elsewhere about a possible homiletic interpretation of Rava's words. I have also written about olive oil.)  Just today, I came across an amazing article that relates to fragrance.

Overnight olfactory enrichment using an odorant diffuser improves memory and modifies the uncinate fasciculus in older adults

Here is the introduction.

Objective: Cognitive loss in older adults is a growing issue in our society, and there is a need to develop inexpensive, simple, effective in-home treatments. This study was conducted to explore the use of olfactory enrichment at night to improve cognitive ability in healthy older adults.

Methods: Male and female older adults (N = 43), age 60–85, were enrolled in the study and randomly assigned to an Olfactory Enriched or Control group. Individuals in the enriched group were exposed to 7 different odorants a week, one per night, for 2 h, using an odorant diffuser. Individuals in the control group had the same experience with de minimis amounts of odorant. Neuropsychological assessments and fMRI scans were administered at the beginning of the study and after 6 months.

Results: A statistically significant 226% improvement was observed in the enriched group compared to the control group on the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test and improved functioning was observed in the left uncinate fasciculus, as assessed by mean diffusivity.

Conclusion: Minimal olfactory enrichment administered at night produces improvements in both cognitive and neural functioning. Thus, olfactory enrichment may provide an effective and low-effort pathway to improved brain health.

Along the way, the article cites research showing that cognitive decline goes hand in hand with olfactory decline; that increased exposure to olfactory stimulation restores olfactory sensitivity; and that two hours, while sleeping, of exposure to fragrance produced by a diffuser, led to fantastic cognitive improvements. The improvement was also seen in MRI scans of the  the uncinate fasciculus, the part of the brain related to learning and memory, which deteriorates in patients suffering from dementia.

Those of you who think that ריחני of Rava's חמרא וריחני were cannabis, here's a better pshat. And even if you look askance on the מי שאחזו pharmacopeia, you might want to go out and invest in a diffuser or a nebulizer for your bedroom. Here are some ratings. The last one in the list uses pure essential oil, not oil mixed with water.

Enquiring minds want to know: 

1. I don't know why they used it during sleep. It should be equally efficacious while you're awake. But I just do not know the mechanism involved.

2. Does this work only with pleasant smells, or anything that stimulates the olfactory sense, even noxious odors? 

3. I think, I imagine, that this only works when the fragrance is not constant. A constant stimulus eventually is not even sensed. If it did, then plumbers and sanitation engineers and people who wear cologne or perfume would be immune to dementia, and that's obviously not the case.

Cameras in Shul

 Here is a question I received, and my response. 

I would appreciate your thoughts.

Hi Rabbi Eisenberg

I have an interesting question which I was wondering whether you or your learned blog readers might be able to assist me in coming to a conclusion. It relates to privacy and halacha (privacy being a very topical issue in the secular world today).

In our shul, the Rabbi put up CCTV cameras all over the place which is probably required for insurance and safety purposes. In our particular shul, I don't believe there are any signs notifying people that there is CCTV and that you are being recorded. I also believe that the Rabbi and/or Gabbai has access to the footage and can access that footage or the replay at any time. 

Do you think there should be clear signs that CCTV is videoing constantly and that these may be accessed by the Rabbi/Gabbai at any time for any reason? Do you think the Rabbi/Gabbai should be allowed to access those videos at any time and for any reason or do you think that it should only be allowed for particular purposes (like a claim on insurance or something criminal etc)? Do you think there should be rules about accessing that footage by himself in the Rabbi/Gabbai's room or there should at least have to be two people in the room (let's say two passwords that both people would need to put in) in order to stop the misuse of the CCTV and tempt someone to spy on people etc.

My own view is that I completely understand the need for CCTV but it is a shame that a shul, a place that you would like to sometimes have a private dialogue with Hashem, is now Big Brother and all of your actions in the shul are now possibly being watched or at least capable of being watched for no good reason.

Thank you

(...)

My response:

Hello  (...)

My shul also installed cameras all over, and they have been very helpful. We have an unfortunate individual in the community that cannot control his impulse to steal, and the footage has been helpful in forcing him to make restitution. 

Besides that, there is a genuine concern of vandalism or serious theft of sifrei Torah or silver implements or the contents of a tzedaka box, and a recording can allow the malefactors' apprehension and punishment.

But I know, myself, that I often do not remember the presence of cameras so that I should act as if I were in public.

When you call credit card companies or utilities you often hear a warning that "your call may be monitored or recorded." Federal law does not require this, but many states have laws which make it illegal to record phone calls without the consent of both parties. Those laws reflect exactly the concern you expressed. A shul, of course, is private property, and on private property, the owner, i.e., the board of the shul, can record whomever they want in public areas. I, too, have cameras in the public areas of my apartment building. 

Please note:  Every state has its own laws about security cameras. But I think that in every state, it is legal to make video recordings in areas where there is no expectation of privacy, even with hidden cameras. Most areas in a shul are not places where there is an expectation of privacy, due to constant public access.

But, federal and state law aside, you have a legitimate concern, and it would seem that as a  matter of derech eretz and respect, it would be best if an innocuous sign were posted reminding people, or informing guests, that they are being recorded.

You did not ask me in my capacity as a lawyer. You asked about the halachic perspective. From that perspective, I would refer to the laws of הזק ראייה. 

Whether  היזק ראייה is a form of injury is a machlokes in the beginning of Bava Basra, and the Gemara says that the concept is alluded to in the words of Bilaam when he looked at Klal Yisrael and וירא את ישראל שוכן לשבטיו and, as the Rashbam says, he was moved to say מה טובו אהליך יעקב.  

According to many achronim, everyone agrees that hezek re'iyah is a hezek, in that it results in embarrassment, boshes. The only machlokes is whether the obligation to avoid that damage devolves primarily on the one observed or on the one observing. Where the injured party has no choice but to do personal things in a certain area, everyone would agree that the other party is responsible for the harm. 

You are troubled by the lack of privacy to daven, to daven like only you and the Ribono shel Olam are present. This is reminiscent of the Mishna in Avos that עומדים צפופים ומשתחוים רווחים. This miracle occurred in order that the people should not be ashamed to say vidui with their neighbor listening. Your case is not quite that degree of intrusion; every one of us ought to cry during davening, and one who does, has nothing to be ashamed of.  כי אדם אין צדיק בארץ אשר יעשה טוב ולא יחטא, and each of us has much for which we tearfully beseech the Ribono shel Olam.

In this situation, as I said, it seems to me that the right thing to do is to post a reminder. I believe that the shul is entitled to place cameras, and people will have to adjust their behavior accordingly, but it is just fair to let everyone know.  Many people use the shul, some tough skinned, some more sensitive. It would be derech eretz to be considerate to everyone using the shul.

I am going to post this question (anonymously, of course!) and my answer, and we'll see what turns up.

UPDATE:

I got this from a friend in Israel.

A local shule used their surveillance tapes in court , when they were

trying to throw out a miscreant  [famous lawyer] who would show up to

shule on Shabbat with a bottle of something and serve his buddies as

well, and they would get rowdy

The shule LOST the case, because the frum judge didn't think being drunk

and rowdy during mussaf is a significant infringement on the rights of

the  [PRIVATE !!! ] shule  [ public accommodation?]

Fortunately he moved away immediately after the case , and i don't think

he's frum anymore either.

Unknown Unknowns. It goes on and on.

By which I mean that having reached seventy plus, assumptions tend to ossify. But that is a mistake, as I find all too often.

This list is just the beginning. 

1. I was surprised to find this Netziv at the end of Sotah who disagrees with what I thought was undisputed. He makes the point sharper by saying that he disagrees with the Ramchal.  If not for that, one might say that what he is saying is compatible with the Mesillas Yesharim. He is saying that it is not, period. 

Perhaps this is common knowledge among baalei mussar, but it was new to me.

Meromei Sadeh Sotah 49b

https://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=40996&st=&pgnum=148

א"ל רב יוסף לתנא לא תיתני ענוה דאיכא אנא. פי' ענוה אינה שפלות הלב, אלא הנהגה בין בני אדם שלא בגסות, ולא כמסלת ישרים, והארכנו במקום אחר. והיינו דאמר רב יוסף שהיה מתנהג כאחד מן התלמידים, כדאי' שלהי מס' הוריות דכ"ב שנין דרבה לא קרא אומנא לביתיה: 

שם. לא תיתני יראת חטא. פי' יראת חטא היינו גדרים מה שאינו עפ"י דין, אלא שירא בעצמו שלא יכשל לפי טבעו וענייניו, והיינו ירא שלא יבא לידי חטא.

I would very much like to see where else he talks about this - והארכנו במקום אחר.

UPDATE: 

Thank you R Micha and R Chaim Brown. It is the Netziv in Behaaloscha, Bamidbar 12:3, in both the Haamek and the Harcheiv:

והאיש משה עניו וגו׳ – ביאר הכתוב דלא משום משה וצערו ענה ה׳ כי היכי דלא לחליש דעתו, אבל באמת משה לא חשש כלל לזה ד״האיש משה עניו וגו׳⁠ ⁠״, אלא משום שנוגע לעיקר התורה לדעת כח מעלתו של משה שהוא למעלה מכל נבואה שבעולם. [הרחב דבר – והוי כדאיתא בברכות (יט,א) בהא דקאמר דמתים לא ידעי כשמדברים אחריהם או ידעי ולא איכפת להו, ומקשה, והא חד אשתעי מילתא בתריה דמר שמואל ונפל קניא ובזעא לארנקא דמוחיה, ומשני, שאני צורבא מרבנן דקודשא בריך הוא תבע ביקריה. הרי דסלקא דעתיה דמשום הכי נענש מן השמים משום דארגיש בצער והקב״ה תבע צעריה, ומסיק דלא משום צעריה אלא משום יקריה דצורבא מרבנן שהוא כבוד התורה. ומביא שם ראיה דאמר רבי יהושע בן לוי כל המספר אחר מטתן של תלמידי חכמים נופל בגיהנם, שנאמר ״והמטים עקלקלותם יוליכם ה׳ את פועלי האון״ (תהילים קכה,ה). והנה לא נזכר כאן (״והמטים עקלקלותם״) ענין מבזה תלמידי חכמים, אבל הכוונה, דבזה שהוא מבזה תלמידי חכמים ומיקל בכבוד התורה ממילא יבואו כמה אנשים לדרכים מקולקלים, לכן, אע״ג שהוא בעצמו אינו פועל און, אבל בזה שהוא מטה עקלקלות היינו שמקרב לידי כך, ״יוליכם ה׳ את פועלי האון״ בעצמו.]

ומשמעות ״עניו״ הוא שאינו חושש לכבודו וצערו, ולא משום שהוא שפל בעצמו ואינו מכיר בעצמו שאינו ראוי לזה הצער והעדר הכבוד, [הרחב דבר – כמו שכתב במסילת ישרים בפירוש ׳עניו׳ שהוא שפל ברך. אבל אינו כן, והרי בסנהדרין (פח,ב) איתא ׳ענוותן ושפל ברך׳, הרי דתרי מילי נינהו, וכך כתב מהרש״א בחדושי אגדות, אבל להיפך מדבריו. והראיה, דאיתא בערכין (טז,ב) ׳תוכחה לשמה וענוה שלא לשמה איזה מהן עדיף׳ וכו׳, ואי משמעות ׳עניו׳ — שפל ברך, היאך היא ׳ענוה שלא לשמה׳. ותו, הרי שלהי מסכת סוטה (מט,ב) איתא ׳משמת רבי בטלה ענוה, אמר רב יוסף, לא תיתני ענוה, דאיכא אנא׳, והאיך יאמר מי שהוא שפל ברך שהוא עניו. ותו, דבספרי תניא וכן הוא באבות דרבי נתן (פרק ט׳) ״(ענו מאד) מכל האדם״ — ולא ממלאכים, ואי איתא שהוא שפלות היאך שייך לומר על מלאכים שאין יודעים ערכם. ולא עוד, אלא שאנחנו אומרים שבח על הקב״ה ׳אין ענוה כענוותיך׳. ובמגילה (לא,א) ׳בכל מקום שאתה מוצא גדולתו של הקב״ה שם אתה מוצא ענותנותו׳.] אלא משמעות ״עניו״ — שהוא מתנהג בלי חשש על כבודו. והיינו דאמר רב יוסף שלהי מסכת סוטה (מט,ב) ׳לא תיתני ענוה דאיכא אנא׳, והוא כדאיתא שלהי מסכת הוריות (יד,א) דכל שני דמלך רבה, רב יוסף אפילו אומנא לביתיה לא קרא, ופירש רש״י שלא רצה לנהוג שררה בעצמו, שבשעה שנצרך לאומן הלך אליו ולא קרא את האומן לביתיה. אע״ג שידע רב יוסף שהוא בערכו של רבה, מ״מ לא חשש לכבודו, והיינו ענוה.

I also saw from the Avnei Nezer in CM 95:11 and 12.

This is going to need its own post. I just came across the ibn E on Bamidbar 12:3 who says it is related to shalev, tranquil.

אבן עזרא

ג

ענו מאד. במשקל שלו והטעם שלא בקש גדולה על אחיו:

2. What is meant by the pesukim we say after putting on tefillin, from Hoshea 2:21-22

וארשתיך לי לעולם וארשתיך לי בצדק ובמשפט ובחסד וברחמים 

וארשתיך לי באמונה וידעת את־יהוה 

(Most people mispronounce it, by the way.  It is not veyadata. - there's a regular patach, not even a chataf patach, under the ayin in veyadaat, וְיָדַעַתְּ.  As to whether the last shva is na or nach, you will do what you have done all your life, irrespective of what the baalei dikduk say.) 

 

Back to the main point:   All the local meforshim except the ibn Ezra say that it is a two way deal. Klal Yisrael does tzedaka and mishpat, Hashem will respond with chesed and rachamim. Klal Yisrael has emunah, Hashem will let you know Him.  

Hashem will take you as His Arusa only when you are worthy, when you are baalei tzedaka and mishpat and are maaminim.

(The ibn Ezra says there is no reason to explain the passuk this way, but everyone but him does.)

Rashi

כא

בצדק ובמשפט. שתתנהגו בהן: 

ובחסד וברחמים. שיבא לך מאתי על ידיהם באברהם אבינו כתיב (בראשית י״ח:י״ט) כי ידעתיו למען אשר יצוה וגו' לעשות צדקה ומשפט וכנגדן נתן לבניו חסד ורחמים מאת הקב"ה שנאמר (דברים י״ג:י״ח) ונתן לך רחמים ושמר ה' אלהיך לך את הברית ואת החסד (שם יז) פסקו מן הצדקה והמשפט כמו שנאמר (עמוס ה׳:ז׳) ההופכים ללענה משפט וצדקה לארץ הניחו אף הקב"ה אסף מהם החסד והרחמים שנ' (ירמיהו ט״ו:א׳) כי אספתי את שלומי מאת העם הזה את החסד ואת הרחמים וכשיחזרו לעשות צדקה ומשפט שנאמר (ישעיהו א׳:כ״ז) ציון במשפט תפדה וגו' הקב"ה מוסיף עליהם רחמים וחסד ועושה אותן עטרה לארבעתן ומושיבן בראשן:

כב

וארשתיך לי באמונה. בשכר האמונה שהאמנת בגולה להבטחות שעל ידי נביאי:

3. 

A Question About the Baal Haturim's Numbering Choices

 An idle thought. The Baal Haturim wrote his Arba Turim and his work on the Torah. His Arba Turim was yeish mei'ayin - its organizational system was invented by him alone. Just as the Rambam created his fourteen part Yad without precedent, the Tur created his four chalakim and their simanim. 

Considering his sefer on the Torah, Rabbeinu Yaakov ben Harav Asher was a man for whom numerical values and systems meant a lot. When organizing the Tur, did he choose any numbers with a double meaning?

One way to remember how many simanim are in Orach Chaim is "לא תרצח." There are 697 simanim in Orach Chaim, תרצ"ז. I.e, lo sirtzach. 

One humorous coincidence does not a summer make.

Here is another candidate.  This was brought to my attention by Rav Yitzchak Aryeh Epstein in his האיחוד בחידוד for Parshas Achrei-Kedoshim, where he says that even though the Torah calls Kilayim a Chok, he found seven explanations for it. Here is his fifth (slightly edited)-

The רוקח says that through tzemer and pishtim, Hevel was killed by Kayin. In fact, Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer says רבי יהושע בן קרחה אומר אמר הקב"ה אל יתערבו מנחת קין והבל לעולם שמא חס ושלום יתערבו בארג בגד .    Kayin's korban was flax & הבל brought a sheep which was wool! The ידות נדרים writes in his דרשה צמר ופשתים that the reason there are so many murders in the world is because of the prevalence of שעטנז & even the שלחן ערוך  hints to this as he begins הלכות שעטנז in רצ"ח & ends in ש"ד which can stand for שפיכת דמים. 

The "דרשה צמר ופשתים" he quotes is from Reb Yehuda Rosenberg, the fabulist who made up stories about the Maharal's Golem, and also wrote the ידות נדרים.  I don't have the sefer, I don't know how much is R Epstein and how much is R Rosenberg, but I found this part quoted as follows:

כמבואר בספרי המקובלים שרציחת קין להבל, באה מן כח הטומאה של שעטנז, שזה הקריב צמר וזה הקריב פשתן. וגם השולחן ערוך מרמז על זה, כי הלכות שעטנז מתחילות בסימן רצ"ח ומסתיימות בסימן ש"ד (ראשי תיבות "שפיכות דמים")

Here is the Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer (21:5-6) :

הביא קין מותר מאכלו קליות זרע פשתן והביא הבל מבכורות צאנו ומחלביהן כבשים שלא נגזזו לצמר ונתעב מנחת קין ונרצית מנחת הבל שנ' וישע יי אל הבל ואל מנחתו. 

 רבי יהושע בן קרחה אומר אמר הקב"ה אל יתערבו מנחת קין והבל לעולם שמא חס ושלום (אפילו) [יתערבו] בארג בגד שנא' לא תלבש שעטנז וגו' אפילו היא מרוקבת לא יעלה עליך שנאמר ובגד כלאיים שעטנז לא יעלה עליך.

It's also in the Tanchuma Breishis 9:1.

וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ יָמִים וַיָּבֵא קַיִן וְגוֹ'. יֵשׁ מִקֵּץ שָׁנָה וְיֵשׁ מִקֵּץ שְׁנָתַיִם, וְיֵשׁ יָמִים, וְיֵשׁ אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה. אָמְרוּ חֲכָמֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה, בְּנֵי אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה הָיוּ קַיִן וָהֶבֶל. וַיָּבֵא קַיִן מִפְּרִי הָאֲדָמָה, מַהוּ? מִן מוֹתַר מַאֲכָלוֹ. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי, זֶרַע פִּשְׁתָּן הָיָה, וְהֶבֶל הֵבִיא גַּם הוּא מִבְּכוֹרוֹת צֹאנוֹ וּמֵחֶלְבֵהֶן לְפִיכָךְ נֶאֱסַר צֶמֶר וּפִשְׁתִּים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: לֹא תִלְבַּשׁ שַׁעַטְנֵז וְגוֹ' (דברים כב, יא). וְאָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּתְעָרֵב מִנְחַת הַחוֹטֵא עִם מִנְחַת הַזַּכַּאי לְפִיכָךְ נֶאֱסַר.

Don't ask me why bidgei kehuna were davka shatnez. That's not the point here. It's a Pirkei d'Rebbi Eliezer, and a Tanchuma, and a Rokeiach.

If it were anyone but the Baal Haturim, I would roll my eyes. And even the Baal Haturim, once I saw that he has הלכות ברכת הריח in Simanim רט"ז and רי"ז, I decided that he must have made a conscious decision to reject this kind of cleverness in his Arba Turim.  Such a thing would not add to anyone's Chochma or Yira or Daas. But......  if anyone has any examples of Siman numbers having some clever connection with the subject matter, please let us know.

UPDATES:

1. הלכות שופר begin in Siman 586, which is gematriya of שופר. (anonymous)

UPDATE ON THE UPDATE:

Rav Avraham Wagner (Yasher koach!) sent us that the Siddur Yaavetz in Hilchos Shofar mentions this, and the Yaavetz adds that it was totally unintended on the part of the Tur, it was just a siman min hashamayim that it was l'shem shamayim and approved, to wit:

דבר נפלא קרה בטור או״ח בסימניו שנזדמנו דיני שופר בסימן השוה עם גימטריא שלו ואע״פ שלא נתכוין המחבר לכך מ״מ נפל האמת באמת להראות כי מן השמים הסכימו ע״י לפי שעשה חיבורו לשם שמים וכל העוסקים במלאכת שמים לשמה מראים להם סימן טוב מה שלא עלה על דעתם

The Yaavetz tells us that any such coincidences were unintended. I wonder why he is so firm on that point. Of course there has to be a logical progression. That's why so many masechtos begin with a discussion in the Gemara or the Rishonim about the logic of their placement. But there are always going to be topics that can be placed anywhere, so why not choose a place number that also has symbolic significance, just like the Torah does?

2. Hanhagos of tashmish hamittah are in ר"ם, how to trasform what easily can be crude and self indulgent into a means towards spiritual growth, to be a Kadosh. (Daniel)  I found someone that says this - Harav Yaakov Moshe Hillel from Yeshiva Chevrat Ahavat Shalom in Yerushalayim.  He says 

ויש לרמוז גם בעניין סימן ר"מ שהוא אותיות "רם" ובהיפוך הוא אותיות "מר", ונרמז בזה שבענינים אלו של שמירת הברית, או שהאדם זוכה להתרומם ונעשה "רם", או שחלילה נופל ויורד ונעשה "מר". והוא כמ"ש בזוהר (עי' ח"א דף רנ"א ע"א) יוסף איהו לתתא ואיהו לעילא, דיוסף הוא ענין היסוד ושמירת הברית, והרי הבחינה הזאת היא הגורמת להיות האדם למעלה או חלילה למטה.

3. And this is the kicker: Harav Avraham Bukspan, in a totally fortuitous moment, opened up a random sefer that he saw, and the author did a fantastic job of gathering precisely such remazim or coincidences.  The Sefer is חיים שיש בהם  by a הרב יצחק שרגא גרוס.  Another seller is here.  From my perspective, if this is the best he could come up with, he demonstrates conclusively that the Baal Haturim, as the Yaavetz said (above in note 1) had absolutely no intention of making any such remazim, and whatever you find is purely coincidental.

Thank you, Rav Bukspan!

 Here is what he has.

Dying quickly, dying slowly.

 Rashi in Beshalach (Shemos 15:5) brings from the Mechilta that the worst of the Mitzrim pursuing the Jews were tossed like straw in the rushing waters and died agonizingly and slowly. The average Mitzri fells like a rock. The best among them sank like lead in the water and drowned quickly. 

כמו אבן. וּבְמָקוֹם אַחֵר "צָלְלוּ כַּעוֹפֶרֶת", וּבְמָקוֹם אַחֵר "יֹאכְלֵמוֹ כַּקַּשׁ", הָרְשָׁעִים כַּקַּשׁ, הוֹלְכִים וּמִטָּרְפִין עוֹלִין וְיוֹרְדִין, בֵּינוֹנִים כָּאֶבֶן, וְהַכְּשֵׁרִים כַּעוֹפֶרֶת שֶׁנָּחוּ מִיָּד (מכילתא):

Slight differences in our Mechilta, pikchim/ksheirim, which is a topic on its own:

ד"א כמו אבן היא היתה מכה בינונית, הרשעים שבהן היו מטורפין כקש, הבינוניים כאבן, הפקחים שבהן צללו כעופרת במים אדירים.

Similarly with the Slav in Bamidbar 11:20, where Rashi brings from the Gemara in Yoma 75b

עד חדש ימים. זוֹ בַכְּשֵׁרִים, שֶׁמִּתְמַצִּין עַל מִטּוֹתֵיהֶן וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִשְׁמָתָן יוֹצְאָה, וּבָרְשָׁעִים הוּא אוֹמֵר "הַבָּשָׂר עוֹדֶנּוּ בֵּין שִׁנֵּיהֶם" (פסוק ל"ג), כָּךְ הִיא שְׁנוּיָה בְסִפְרֵי, אֲבָל בִּמְכִילְתָּא שְׁנוּיָה חִלּוּף, הָרְשָׁעִים אוֹכְלִים וּמִצְטַעֲרִין שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם, וְהַכְּשֵׁרִים הַבָּשָׂר עוֹדֶנּוּ בֵּין שִׁנֵּיהֶם (עי' יומא ע"ה):

Question: 

In the Gemara in Sotah, Rebbi holds that the deadly effect of the Sotah water can be suspended for up to three years if the woman has a zechus of Torah or Mitzvos. If she has no zechusim, she dies grotesquely on the spot. If she has zechusim, she might survive for three years and then die in the same manner as every other guilty Sotah. But, he says, even the Sotah with Zechusim, who lives for several years, shows signs of illness immediately, and slowly deteriorates - 

רבי אומר: הזכות תולה במים המאררים, ואינה יולדת ואינה משבחת, אלא מתנונה והולכת, לסוף היא מתה באותה מיתה.

Question: why by the Yam Suf and the Slav is it assumed that dying slowly is worse, while by the Sotah the one with merits dies slowly while the purely wicked dies on the spot.

(The Sifri Rashi brings in Bamidbar that the less wicked lasted longer at least is talking where they died in bed surrounded by their family. By Sotah, she dies horribly anyway, plus she lingers for three years, getting sicker and sicker.)

I did not see anyone ask the question; I was just preparing my shiur out loud and my wife, Malkie, asked me the question ("That doesn't make any sense. Why would dying slowly be better than dying quickly, especially if she ended up dying like every Sotah?") 

In any case, the anwer I have is simple, if not necessarily ניכרים דברי אמת. By the Yam and the Slav, lasting longer was worse than death. The misery of the Mitzrim, who were essentially "waterboarded," was torture, and the ones that died and were done with it were far better off. I assume that מתנונה is not so horrible, and living longer, even with מתנונה, even knowing what awaits her in the end, is better than dying quickly. 

Rav Avraham Wagner showed me his peirush on the Targum Yonasan titled נער יונתן printed תשס"ט where he points out that the word for death "נגיד" or "איתנגיד" is related to the word for drawing. He says that it can mean the death of a tzadik, כמשחל ביניתא מחלבא, or it can mean "drawn out," which is terrible. He says that where it says ויגוע וימות it means drawn out a little, which is good. Where it says just ויגוע, it means drawn out for a long time, which is bad. His proof is from a braisa in Smachos 3:8-10 that says 

המת ליום א' מיתה של זעף, המת לשנים מיתה של בהלה, המת לשלשה מיתה של מגפה, לארבעה לחמשה מיתה חטופה, המת לששה מיתה האמורה בתורה, המת לשבע מיתה של חיבה, יתר מכאן של יסורין... אמר רבי יהודה חסידים הראשונים היו מתייסרין בחולי מעיים כעשרים יום קודם מיתתן כדי למרק את הכל, כדי שיבואו זכאין לעתיד לבא, שנאמר (משלי כ"ז) מצרף לכסף וכור לזהב ואיש לפי מהללו.

But a three year process is definitely the worse option, unless you say that she wasn't deathly ill the whole time. 

Here is how Reb Avraham said it.

יתנגיד. עמש"כ לעיל (ה' כ"ד). ואונקלוס תרגם כאן ל' מיתה שזהו ענין גויעה כמש"כ הרדק (בשרש גוע) מיתה קלה וזהו ג"כ ענין נגד בארמית שהוא ענין המשכה כי כן תרגם משכו (שמות י"ב כ"א) – נגודו וכן תרגם ג"כ מקשה (שמות כ"ה ל"א) שהוא ג"כ מענין הזה כמש"כ שם (וע' בתוס' נדה ל"ו: ד"ה גדייה ובשו"ת המיוחסות להרשב"א סי' מ"ג ובגליון הש"ס לרעק"א ב"ב י"ג.). וזה ענין מיתה קלה "כמשחל בניתא מחלבא" (ברכות ח'.) שהוא נמשך בקלות ובשלמות וע' ב"ב (סוף ט"ז.) וב"ר (ס"ב א'). אך ע' ב"ק (ס"ז:) ברש"י ובמאירי. ויש ליישב וע' בסוף דברי. ועכ"פ לכן גבי יעקב ת"א איתנגיד כי לא רצה להזכיר בו המיתה כמש"כ כבר וכאן לא רצה להשתמש בתיבה זו המורה על מיתת הצדיקים כי דור המבול לא בקל מתו כנ"ל מגמ' דב"ב (העיר מו"ח שליט"א: נגיד הוא ג"כ לשון מלקות [ע' בערוך ערך נגד ב']). אך י"ל דלשון זה נופל ג"כ על מיתה חמורה ע"פ מאי דאי' במס' שמחות (פ"ג ה"ט) המת ליום א' מיתה של זעף וכו' המת לז' מיתה של חיבה יותר מכאן מיתה של יסורים (וע"ע במו"ק דף כ"ח.). ולפי"ז יש לפרש דבמקום שנא' ויגוע – שנמשך, וימת או ויאסף וכדו' – שלא נמשך ביותר ה"ז מיתת הצדיקים ובמקום שנא' ויגוע סתם מורה על המשכת היסורים ובדור המבול נמשכו הרבה כמארז"ל (עדיות פ"ב מ"י) משפט דור המבול י"ב חודש. ויש להביא ראי' לזה מפירש"י בפ' בהעלותך (במדבר י"א כ') שהביא מחלוקת בין הספרי והמכילתא אם הכשרים מתו מיד והרשעים נמשכו עד חודש ימים או להיפך עש"ה ומבואר כדברינו דיש צדדים לכאן ולכאן. וכן מצאתי אח"כ בב"ר (ס"ב ב') שפי' גויעה הוא חולי מעיים ע"ש וא"כ בפשיטות יש לפרש כמש"כ (וכ"ז הוא דלא כמש"כ הרמב"ן סוף חיי שרה כ"ה י"ז). וע' מש"כ לקמן (ז' כ"א):

Pesach: Nashim Tzidkaniyos

 At one of the seudos, I asked my granddaughters to list all the things women did that made Yetzias Mitzrayim possible. They came up with quite a list, some of which, but not all, are mentioned in Sotah 11b. I don't think they missed anything.

1. Miriam had prophesied that her parents would have a child that would lead the Jewish people to freedom. When they separated, she convinced them to remarry. According to the Gemara, at that point Yocheved was already three months pregnant, but in any case, the remarriage of Amram and Yocheved led all the other Jews to remarry and have children.

2. The Jewish men were thoroughly beaten and in despair. They had given up. It was only their wives, who fed them and washed them and encouraged them and brought them back to life. They gave them the strength to live and to raise families.

3. Shifra and Pua contravened Pharaoh's gzeira and even fed and took care of the children that were born, and they contributed to a great increase in the population of Klal Yisrael.

4. The daughter of Pharaoh saved Moshe as he floated in the Nile.

5. Miriam arranged for Moshe to be nursed by a Jewish woman, actually his mother Yocheved. Besides saving him from starving, because he refused to nurse from an idolator, this conspiracy among Bisya and Miriam and Yocheved ensured that he would be raised in a Jewish environment by the leaders of Klal Yisrael as well as in the house of Pharoah. 

6. Tzipora saved Moshe Rabbeinu from imminent death by having their child circumcised. 

I said this over to my shiur, and said that the story of Yetzias Mitzrayim is the story of the faith and wisdom and courage and heroism of women. The men had given up, Moshe would not have been born, and even after he was born, he was on the verge of spiritual and physical death if he had not been saved by women.

This has been noted by the Rishonim in Pesachim and Megilla. For example, Tosfos in Megilla cites the other rishohim that say this is the pshat in "אף הן היו באותו הנס" but argues on that pshat in the takana.

שאף הן היו באותו הנס. פירש רשב"ם שעיקר הנס היה על ידן בפורים על ידי אסתר בחנוכה על ידי יהודית בפסח שבזכות צדקניות שבאותו הדור נגאלו וקשה דלשון שאף הן משמע שהן טפלות ולפירושו היה לו לומר שהן לכך נראה לי שאף הן היו בספק דלהשמיד ולהרוג וכן בפסח שהיו משועבדות לפרעה במצרים וכן בחנוכה הגזירה היתה מאד עליהן.

I don't think that these rishonim disagree with Rashi and the Rashbam's assertion that the women were the primary cause; they only say that their primary role was not why Chazal said that the ptur of Zman Grama does not apply, or why Chazal created a new mechayeiv.  It was the fact that they, too, faced the same existential danger.

Ron Cope, a member of my shiur, insightful as always, thought about the stark imbalance, and said, "So what did the men do?" The initiative, the courage, the strength, the heroism, are primarily those of the women. What indeed did the men do? 

I answered that the men did what needed to be done in public, what needed to be aggressive and confrontational;  the warnings and threats to Pharaoh, the makkos, the splitting of the sea. But certainly, Yetzias Mitzrayim was made possible by the women far more than the men.

I later realized there is a much more interesting way to look at this.

The women did what needed to be done. The men did what God told them to do.

Shabbos HaGadol Drasha

 I said this in shul this week, and it is simple and perhaps קרוב לאמת, so perhaps someone might find it useful. Please don't point out the Minchas Chinuch in 21 about the makor for the mitzva of zechira and sippur, and Reb Chaim, and that the ikker of the Seder is to be mechazeik emunah, and fifty other things. This is about making an important and memorable point without distractions.

We are commanded to recall Yetzias Mitzrayim every day of our lives, morning and evening. In what way is the mitzva of recalling Yetzias Mitzrayim during the seder different? 

The passuk from which we derive this special mitzva is Vehigadeta le'vincha. While the everyday mitzva derives from (Shemos 13:3) זָכוֹר אֶת הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר יְצָאתֶם מִמִּצְרַיִם מִבֵּית עֲבָדִים, the special mitzva of the seder is from (Shemos 13:8) וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא. The Targum Onkelos there translates וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ as וּתְחַוֵי לִבְרָךְ, not just "tell your son," but rather "show your son." 

The special mitzva of Haggada involves re-enactment. As the Mishna says, and we say at the seder, 

בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר חַיָּב אָדָם לִרְאוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ כְאִלּוּ הוּא יָצָא מִמִּצְרַיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות יג), וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֵאמֹר, בַּעֲבוּר זֶה עָשָׂה ה' לִי בְּצֵאתִי מִמִּצְרָיִם.

 In each and every generation a person must view himself as though he personally left Egypt

The Rambam makes  a slight change. Instead of  לִרְאוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ, to view himself, he says

בְּכָל דּוֹר וָדוֹר חַיָּב אָדָם לְהַרְאוֹת אֶת עַצְמוֹ כְּאִלּוּ הוּא בְּעַצְמוֹ יָצָא עַתָּה מִשִּׁעְבּוּד מִצְרַיִם

In each and every generation, a person must present himself as if he, himself, has now left the slavery of Egypt,

I suppose the reason the Rambam changed the language of our mishna from "to view himself" to "to present himself" is because it is hard to imagine something that we never experienced, but one can re-enact. 

What, then, is the pshat in our mishna? I think it is that in order to feel as if we ourselves left Mitzrayim, we need to think deeply about the foundation, the basis, of Yetzias Mitzrayim, and that is the feeling of Hakaras Hatov. This middah, this powerful awareness of how grateful we should be for all the blessings we have, is the single most important root of the Yetzias Mitzrayim experience, from its very beginning to it ultimate goal.

When Hashem appeared to Moshe Rabbeinu and told him the time had come for the geula, and that he must go to Mitzrayim to lead the people toward their redemption, Moshe did not go immediately. The Medrash Tanchuma says 

בְשָׁעָה שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמֹשֶׁה, וְעַתָּה לְכָה וְאֶשְׁלָחֲךָ אֶל פַּרְעֹה. אָמַר לוֹ מֹשֶׁה: רִבּוֹן הָעוֹלָם, אֵינִי יָכוֹל, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקִּבְּלַנִי יִתְרוֹ וּפָתַח לִי אֶת פֶּתַח בֵּיתוֹ וַאֲנִי עִמּוֹ כְּבֵן. וּמִי שֶׁהוּא פּוֹתֵחַ פִּתְחוֹ לַחֲבֵרוֹ, נַפְשׁוֹ הוּא חַיָּב לוֹ. 

At the time the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Come now, therefore, and I will send thee unto Pharaoh (Exod. 3:10), Moses replied: “Master of the Universe, I cannot leave, for Jethro welcomed me and opened his home unto me, and I am like a son unto him.” If one opens his door to his fellowmen, the latter owes him his very life. 

Moshe knew exactly what the Jews were experiencing in Egypt, and when Hashem told him to go redeem them, he should have jumped to go. But he did not. Because he knew that there had to be a way to doing his work without showing ingratitude to his father in law, so he went to ask Yisro's permission before leaving.

Moshe Rabbeinu knew that the foundation of Yetzias Mitzrayim is הכרת הטוב, and you can't catalyze that miracle with an act of being כפוי טוב.

The Makkos involving the water of the Nile,  the water that bore Moshe as an infant, and the one that changed the sand to vermin, the sand that hid the body of the man Moshe killed, Moshe could not be the instrument of those makkos because of his hakaras hatov - hakaras hatov to inanimate, insensate objects! 

In truth, Chazal find the seed of the entire enslavement of the Jewish people in the trait of כפיית טובה. Rabbeinu Bachya says that as soon as Pharaoh demonstrated his ingratitude to Yosef, despite all that Yosef had done for Egypt and the house of the Pharaoh, it foreshadowed his denial of the existence of God - 

ובמדרש אשר לא ידע את יוסף, כל הכופר בטובתו של חברו סופו שיכפור בטובתו של הקב"ה שהרי כתיב (שמות א ח) אשר לא ידע את יוסף ובסוף אמר (שמות ה) לא ידעתי את ה'.

This theme continues all the way to the denouement of the redemption, Mattan Torah. As the Ramban says, the Aseres Hadibros do not begin with "I am your God who created heaven and earth." It begins אָנֹכִי ה' אֱלֹקיךָ אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִיךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם מִבֵּית עֲבָדִים לֹא יִהְיֶה לְךָ אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים עַל פָּנָי.  You were slaves, without a past, without a present, without a future, and I took you out and chose you to be my emissaries on earth, it is because of Hakaras Hatov to Hashem that we accepted the Aseres Hadibros. 

With this in mind, we understand why Matza is so important. We didn't leave Mitzrayim ourselves. But by thinking deeply of all the gifts we received from so many people, and most importantly, the great gift of life and opportunity we received from the Ribono shel Olam, we can imagine what it must have been like to be redeemed from slavery. Everything precious in our lives is a gift from the Ribono shel Olam, and that is something we share with the generation of Mitzrayim. By cultivating that middah tovah, we can see ourselves as if we ourselves were redeemed from Mitzrayim.  Matza represents that middah. An arrogant person, a person that is puffed up like bread, can not be makir tov, not to his parents or his friends or to God Himself. He feels that he is a self made man, and he only has what he deserves and created by himself. There is no room for Hakaras Hatov in such a miserable man's poisonous philosophy; all he asks is for God to stay out of his way, and he'll do just fine. That is what Chametz represents. Humility and simplicity is the only possible way for a man to recognize what the Ribono shel Olam has done and continues to do for him, and that is what Matza reminds us. 

Hachaver Mike Nussbaum pointed out that the song 'Dayenu' is entirely about the concept of Hakaras Hatov. If Hashem had only given us this, how grateful we would be, we couldn't expect anything more - and then He showered greater and greater gifts upon us! What a perfect expression this is of the most important theme of Sippur Yetzias Mitzrayim.

The idea that the most important theme of the seder is hakaras hato, is Reb Yerucham's approach.

Reb Chatzkel Levenstein held that the main theme is Emunah.