KMTT - the Torah Podcast
KMTT - Special Pesach Shiur
KMTT - Special Pesach Shiur by Rav Ezra Bick
KMTT. KVT on Tessetora with Vahasemil Shalayim. Today is Thursday. Khat Nissan. The broadcasts this week are dedicated in memory of a Vahamvanya Akrov-Bherman. Yihije-Zhro-Boh. Instead of the Shiro in Pashata-Shavua, which unfortunately caused a very Vahasemil Shalayim, we were not able to prepare. And this part of our getting ready for Hagrapessa, instead of Shiro in Pashata-Shavua, we have a Shiro in Hagrapessa, in the concept of Freerut, as events in Hagrapessa, which will take place at the regular Shiro in Pashata-Shavua. During the vacation of Hagrapessa, so Pashata-Shavua will, in fact, be given. So Pashata-Shavua will, in fact, be given. So Pashata-Shmini, the weaker Pashata-Shmini, after Pashata-Shavua won't be regular Shiro in Pashata-Shavua, and in the end of Shavata-Shavua again, the Pashata-Shmini. In the Haggadah, we have in the beginning a list of halahat of laws concerning the mitzvah asupuya-chapmitayim. Now, if we don't only do the mitzvah asupuya-chapmitayim, but we explicitly relate the halahat asupuya-chapmitayim. In the world, obviously, the Haggadah, in the beginning, you have one statement of the Haggadah-chapmitayim. So you have a statement, a basic statement of almost any mitzvah, what is the shear? How much does one have to do to achieve and fulfill the mitzvah? So you have a statement, and you have a statement, you have a statement, and you have a statement of the haggadah-chapmitayim, and you have a statement of the haggadah-chapmitayim. Another amount is a kazayat, one is eaten a kazayat of mitzvah. You fulfill the mitzvah. The reason is basic form. The moral is a kazayat, four cups of wine. So you need four, not five. Each cups, each cup, has a livid of wine. The moral is a kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim, and it's a kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim. The moral is a kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim, and it's a kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim, and it's a kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim, and it's a kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim. So apparently it's till the morning, because it didn't stop until the time of saying kazayat of the haggadah-chapmitayim. Et cetera, et cetera. My question is, why, in fact, is there no shi'ul le malah? Why is there no upper limit? Almost all myths have it. There is, in fact, a Mishnah, which we recite every day as part of the katatah-chapmitayim. A will design shame and shield, things which do not have a upper limit. And in fact, Chipo, your type of sign, is not mentioned in that list. I'll pay aye, I've got the Korean, but I don't, I don't need to press the limit on the tour. So, of course, I thought a technical question. I mean, it's possible that it's not an list, so it's left out, maybe the list is not exhaustive. It's not a list on that. In fact, it's exhaustive. There are no occasionally questions. There are more exceptions than there are examples of exhaustive lists. But nonetheless, it is striking that it's not mentioned in fact, if we look at the list, the inclusion list is quite clear why it's true. They're either mixed though or can we look less than them, helping others, where it makes sense that there should be no upper limit. The more you do, the better it is in the year. It's just to help somebody, so why should you help money a little bit, you're not doing it or to be your type of sign. I gave a quarter to staka. You're doing it to help somebody, so there's more people to help than you have to do more. But Ayeon is the mitzvah of bringing a koban one on visits, kashto, and Shloshit Haragalim. So, I also have no upper limit, you're given to God, you're showing you the version to God, there's no, there's intrinsically no upper limit. And of course the muttoa, which is "Keyan of Aokimena", so one can never learn enough to her. But there's not an off-hand reason why sipur, it's the ethnic sign, should be the way, it is a mitzvah too, to tell the story, see, tell the story, it's an extent to tell the story, it's an hour to tell the story, you've told the story completely. Everyone who has to hear it and has to know the fact, know the fact, you've told it to yourself, you've told it to your son, you've told it to your family, you've told it to your guests. This is the reason, what is the meaning of (speaks in foreign language) We will come back to this question, hopefully, I'll remember to answer this question in the end. In the meantime, I want to take a detour and examine the nature of the concept of (speaks in foreign language) in the commentary to (speaks in foreign language) ask the question on a well-known statement of the (speaks in foreign language) The (speaks in foreign language) concerning the din of (speaks in foreign language) There's a law that says that when you (speaks in foreign language) that that should be connected without any (speaks in foreign language) to (speaks in foreign language) We're so used to the (speaks in foreign language) In fact, there is no (speaks in foreign language) between (speaks in foreign language) But there is a rule that says that one should put the two of them together. And (speaks in foreign language) should immediately proceed and be uninterrupted with the beginning of (speaks in foreign language) So the (speaks in foreign language) We're trying to explain that (speaks in foreign language) That (speaks in foreign language) should be connected, should be immediately next to (speaks in foreign language) We don't ask (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) What's so special, you say it's a good thing, but that gives you (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) In fact, it's a (speaks in foreign language) It's a clear and explicit (speaks in foreign language) And maybe it's just my fault (speaks in foreign language) I just never noticed it, never struck me so much in the face when I read the (speaks in foreign language) Perhaps it's the context of (speaks in foreign language) So in fact, it's not a tradition of (speaks in foreign language) It is in fact an explicit (speaks in foreign language) The reason why God took us out of (speaks in foreign language) The reason why God redeemed us was that (speaks in foreign language) Would be to him slaves. (speaks in foreign language) The Suq says (speaks in foreign language) For they, in the Jews, are my slaves. That I took them out of (speaks in foreign language) That the reason why I took them out of (speaks in foreign language) Was that they should be slaves to God. (speaks in foreign language) So (speaks in foreign language) Is about (speaks in foreign language) And (speaks in foreign language) As I stated (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) Is an expression of (speaks in foreign language) Here also something which perhaps we all pay attention. We use the word (speaks in foreign language) In the nice English, it translated as service. The divine service, you've got a services. That's fine English, fine American English. But the word is little. You serve God. The word is (speaks in foreign language) The word is (speaks in foreign language) You serve and slave are the same, are the same word here. (speaks in foreign language) So (speaks in foreign language) Is service. (speaks in foreign language) The reason why there was a (speaks in foreign language) Was that we should be servants. And that's why you have to be (speaks in foreign language) And then (speaks in foreign language) That's why (speaks in foreign language) Is in fact (speaks in foreign language) Because he makes himself. He fulfills the service of God. The service of God is the key. It has to be developed, of course, in observant of (speaks in foreign language) But is the key to (speaks in foreign language) In general. (speaks in foreign language) Now (speaks in foreign language) So (speaks in foreign language) Might appear to be very surprising. It's not what we learned. In kindergarten, in first grade, in second grade, we thought the reason why God took us out of it was to make us free. Not to make us slaves. (speaks in foreign language) It's not just my kindergarten teacher taught me that. We say it in the diagoning. (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) That is the time of our liberation. Of our freedom. At the time of our slavery. We should change the (speaks in foreign language) We should say (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) But we don't. But (speaks in foreign language) No, it's he points out. It's a pursuit. God took us out of it's sense that we should be to him slaves. Apparently, the concept of (speaks in foreign language) and the concept of servitude of God, service of God, are identical. (speaks in foreign language) Question is how could that be? (speaks in foreign language) How is it possible that servitude and freedom are identical? How can we say that without basically making a mockery of our use of our language? (speaks in foreign language) What in fact is the difference between the service of Egypt, the service of power and the service of God? Is it merely a more distinguished kind of service? God did us a favor by switching the owners, switching the masters, so that instead of being a servant of someone small and insignificant enough servant of someone great and mighty? That would not have justified calling it favorite. What is the difference between? (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) The first difference is that when you serve a person, he has needs, and you are serving his needs, of course rather than your own. But every person, the whole reason why slavery exists is because it's exploitation. You're using somebody else, the owner is using someone else to fulfill his own needs. With God that doesn't exist, God doesn't have needs that we fulfill. And therefore being a servant of God, being a slave of God, does not have that element of exploitation whereby everything you do is because someone else has a problem. But that's only the introduction to, I think, the real point. The real point has to do with what does service of God mean at all. And there we can take an example, from the example that's in webinariana. (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) is I request God to fulfill my needs. (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) (speaks in foreign language) Why does that service of God? I ask him to serve me basically. He should do things for me. And the answer is because in Fila, we are stating in a most unequivocal manner that everything that we could possibly have has to come from God. In other words, the actions of service here is the dependency. We get everything in our lives from God. And that is a essential nature of slavery. But the slave does not have an independent identity. His identity divides from his relationship with his master. Who he is, is derivative. And then I think it's the real point of (speaks in foreign language) We are (speaks in foreign language) We're external in the image of God. That means that the true identity of a person is not found in his present limited state. To be equal to what you are, to be just the person that you are, is a form of slavery. It's slavery to your desire. It's slavery to your situation. It's slavery to your society. It's slavery to the limits of being finite. But the freedom of man is because he's sentimental to him. Because he is potentially, he in every second is becoming or trying to become more like God. And the method which should become like God is in fact by accepting his yelp, by accepting his misvote. The Torah is a means whereby we have, we accept that we have to be like God. We will get everything in our lives at the value from God and being connected to God. So that is at once a form of slavery, because you give up an internal or autonomous definition. You say, "What am I? I am like God. I am seldom a look him." Practically, it's a form of God because the way to become that is to fulfill his misvotes, which is the purpose of a misvote. But that is also the ultimate freedom of man, because now you in fact gain an identity which supersedes and transcends the limitations of human life, of finite definitions. You're no longer just the sum of X, Y and Z qualities, but you are a creative and developing thing person where the only limit is the infinity of God to whom you have been connected. In other words, and this I think is the crucial point here is the freedom, the spirit of creative development. It's the divine creativity, spirituality, the life. Being alive is being every second, receiving from God and following after him, becoming an inherent, a follower of God, following the little sense, following God's footsteps, a follower of God, an evite Hashem, that is the meaning of true of true freedom. To give an example of this within the Seder, so among other things, the Seder is telling the story. It's telling how the heart is mentioned in before, and it's also acting out. The man, Laurent, that is Khasad, Calpaths, all sorts of things which are acting out, things which relate to the story of each year at the time. One of the things is Laurent, you eat bitter herbs, why? Why was it necessary to recreate the bitterness of the time? We say in the Haggadah, because dolvadol hai habadam darotatat smokhi, even who you are telling it's time. And I may call it the Ramban's version, which I don't think is different, but it's more clear. From the Ramban, we understand our version better. Hai habadam darotat smokh, laharotat smokh, to show himself, such as the same self, ke iu hu atayat smokhi. As dolvah now came out of Egypt. There is no the Nissa right there in the Torah. Sometimes we have it's not where we remember something in the past. Why should we remember it? There might be a mitzvah of Tilsuma Nissa, a lucky category of publicized in God's greatness. Hai bakat ne lo pranukha, Tilsuma Nissa, to publicize the miracle. The Galat Estelle is apparently a publicized in God's miracle. But that's not recreating it. If you're probably accepting a miracle, it took place way in the past. And that's not the meaning of if you'd fully accept Messiah. If that was true, then you would have to have ten people there. Which is a kind of qua nun to put publicize in something. That should be done by the Ramban. It should be done in public. Then it's not our thanking God's, it's something that took place in the past. And I think that's part of the Ha'gada. There's a bakash, a land of a gala, a table of tangos. But that's only a small part of that. So that you wouldn't have to recreate. You wouldn't have to allow all of that smoke, either who, I tell you, it's not even the same. The Cipu, is that the same, isn't about the past. It's about the present. You have to come out of slavery again. Why does it come out of slavery again? Well, I was in slavery once. It's gone. I'm not a slave anymore. Slavery in the usual Western sense or freedom in the usual Western sense of the word is a one-time thing. If you're the yes or no, it's black and white. Either you're a slave or you're not a slave. If the chains have been broken, you're not a slave. You're free to do whatever you want. But the answer is that the freedom that the Ha'gada is speaking about is not the freedom to do whatever you want. But it's the freedom that comes from following God. And therefore, it's not a one-time thing. In fact, it's a change of parallel broken, and you went into the desert. You might have been free in the technical sense, but you weren't free in the evidence of sense. Only after you receive a Torah in sinite, did you become a day of shame? And only to the extent that you continually develop more and more and more and run after God. Because freedom is potential here. It's to be like God, to be infinite. And if you never actually achieve freedom, you only achieve liberation. You have to free yourself and act of freeing oneself by constantly following God. There is the freedom. It's not a state. It could be free. It's an activity. And therefore, once a year, we have to incletate that message. Not because you've slipped back and become a slave. And if you have to free stuff again, all of a sudden, I just got to power those back. But only by continually freeing myself. Only by being liberating. Not liberated, but liberating all the time. Do I, in fact, achieve my own freedom? And that is through the service of God. As cayyavadam, the autotakmokhuhu. Assah! It's very second. You're passing from slavery to freedom. Why do we have an instead of moral? I have to see that I'm free. We have to see that I wasn't free. The law is the bitterness of the slavery. Because the answer is that you're not now experiencing the state of being free. You're experiencing the transition from slavery to freedom. The act of liberation. And therefore, it's a sad thing. It's a sad thing in order to experience the exhilaration of the moment of liberation. Part of that experience, you have to be able to taste the bitterness of the slavery. Not really to appreciate it more. If the mister was the thank God, I could see if you would say that we have to taste a little bitterness. In other words, we really appreciate enough to thank God. But I think the point here is different. Since the mister is not thanking God, but experiencing the passage from slavery to freedom. So the slavery is part of the experience. It's the line of divide. It's crossing the border. Crossing the border is only a point. The experience of crossing the border has one foot on one side and one foot on the other. With a clear direction in which we're going. And it's impossible to experience the exhilaration of becoming free. That a little bit of taste on the tongue of Maron. With that Maron, as we know, is not independent in the Torah. As opposed to with that, mister. Or it says, "By Eren as to who matos." You have to eat mister mister mister. It doesn't say it's Maron mister. It says, "When you eat the common tessach, you have to eat it all mister to Maron." That's the reason why, holastically, this man is dead is not common pessach. We're not common pessach today. And therefore, Maron doesn't apply minatolate today. There is no biblical mitzvah of eating Maron today because it's not common pessach. Maron is only eaten as a condiment. There's an extra together with the common pessach. Hillel, as we all know, ate him literally together. It's called cholera. He didn't eat Maron. He ate cholera pessach with Maron. He even got the cholera mim with this green. So you eat him separately, but the pessach is explicit. You don't have to eat him together literally. But the reason why the Maron is there is in order to accompany the experience of koban pessach. What is koban pessach? It's theoretically the main mitzvah of pessach night. We don't have it today. Unfortunately, but it's the main mitzvah of the pessach night, koban. Pessach is a koban cholera mister koban, which is eaten by people together with God. You're sharing, so to speak, God's food. God and you are eating together. That's the assimilation within me of my death. In fact, I don't eat my own food. I eat a God's table. That's exactly what it ever does. He doesn't have his own table. He eats at his master's table. When you've been a koban cholera mim or koban pessach on pessach night, that's fine. In the daytime, you eat it at night. So you don't have your own food. You're eating a God's table. God receives the food, puts them tables and bites you to join him. That's exactly the idea I'm expressing of what is freedom. It's being totally dependent on God and receiving one's identity, one's food, in a sense, from him. How does one eat the koban pessach? Al-mat-salt una-rahim. You have to eat it together with mother. You have to experience what the mother is doing here. The mother keeps you on the cuffs. It keeps you on the passage from one to the other. It doesn't let you think that you're eating koban pessach. It means celebrating a state of being wonderfully free. It's celebrating the entrance into freedom. And the entrance into freedom is a continual dynamic thing of constantly climbing and striving to act and to become more like God, to follow in his ways, to find him, and to be like him. And that is the return to our opening point, I think, the reason why mitzvah, to put it up to the same as the vahshah in-law shi'u. Not because it's better to say more than to say less, as is the fact with (speaking in foreign language) It's better to give more than that. Why should you give more? Because someone else benefits from it. Here, it's not that it's necessarily better. You achieve more by telling more than telling less. Here, it's not by, it's not, it's not quantitative. It's the continuity, the continuance of it. (speaking in foreign language) Because liberation is a continual process. Slavery is the human condition. And liberation is something which you have to do constantly, to transcend yourself and to become like God. As cholamal beh, you can't stop. The principle is that you shouldn't even think. It's not something which has a large shi'u, or a very large shi'u. It's something which the word shi'u doesn't apply to. Because we're not trying to achieve an amount. We're trying to achieve a process. (speaking in foreign language) The fact that you continually increase and maintain the tension of bringing oneself out of material. (speaking in foreign language) French philosopher said man is born free and is everywhere in chains. The natural state of man is freedom. But he's fallen into slavery. People have enslaved him. Judaism is ten blocks of the opposite. The Jew was born in slaves. Jewish history begins in slavery. (speaking in foreign language) But we are continually trying to free oneself. If you falter in that activity of self-liberation by following God, you fall back automatically into slavery. That's the natural condition of man. Where free's man is Torah Babadah. And therefore, (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) You've been listening to the shi'u. (speaking in foreign language) There'll be no (speaking in foreign language) I apologize, but we're ready for a bit on the occasion. (speaking in foreign language) And we're unable to arrange (speaking in foreign language) We will be back tomorrow to the last episode. The last broadcast before (speaking in foreign language) Before we go out on vacation. If I said today is true, then we'll start to experience it. Including the broadcast on time T.T. will be experiencing freedom for a while. We'll have an ever-shabbat program tomorrow, which will be the last program before passage. Until then, this is Ezubik, (speaking in foreign language) wishing you all (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) (speaking in foreign language) [BLANK_AUDIO]