Yalkut Shimoni on Torah Reader

"And you shall guard this day throughout your generations" (Exodus 12:17). Why is this said? Has it not already been said, "No work shall be done on them"? From that I would know only matters that fall under the category of labor; matters that fall under the category of rest [shevut, rabbinically restricted activity], from where do I learn them? Scripture says, "And you shall guard," to include matters that fall under rest. And even the intermediate days of the festival should be forbidden under rest. And logic supports this: since the first festival day and the last are called a holy convocation, and the intermediate days of the festival are also called a holy convocation, then if you have learned about the first festival day [and the last] that, being called a holy convocation, they are forbidden under rest, is it not logical that the intermediate days of the festival, being called a holy convocation, are also forbidden under rest? Scripture therefore says, "On the first day a solemn rest and on the eighth day a solemn rest" (Leviticus 23:39). "In the first month, on the fourteenth" and so on (Exodus 12:18). Scripture established it as an obligation. "Until the twenty-first day of the month." Why is this said? Because it says, "Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread" (above, verse 15), from which I would know only the days; the nights, from where? Scripture says, "Until the twenty-first day," to include the nights.

It has been taught: Leaven, whether before its time or after its time, one transgresses regarding it a negative commandment and excision, the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Shimon says: leaven before its time, one transgresses nothing at all regarding it; within its time, one transgresses a negative commandment and excision. Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: Wonder at yourself — how can leaven be forbidden in benefit all seven days? And from where do we learn that one who eats leaven from the sixth hour onward is under a negative commandment? As it says, "You shall not eat leaven with it" (Deuteronomy 16:3), the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Shimon said to him: Is it possible to say so? It already says, "You shall not eat leaven with it; seven days you shall eat with it unleavened bread": at the time when there is a positive duty of "arise and eat matzah," there is also "do not eat leaven"; at the time when there is no "arise and eat matzah," there is no "do not eat leaven." What is Rabbi Yehudah's reason? Three verses are written: "And no leaven shall be eaten" (Exodus 13:3); "You shall eat nothing leavened" (below, verse 20); "You shall not eat leaven with it" — one for before its time, one within its time, and one after its time. And Rabbi Shimon needs "You shall eat nothing leavened" for that which has been taught: "leavened" — from this I would know only what became leavened on its own; what became leavened from some other substance, from where? Scripture says, "nothing leavened." And he needs "no leaven shall be eaten" for that which Rabbi Yose the Galilean taught: from where do we know that the leaven of the Egyptian Passover applied only one day? Scripture says, "no leaven shall be eaten," and adjacent to it, "this day you are going out." Rava said: matzah in this present time is required by Torah law, bitter herbs by rabbinic law. Why is bitter herbs different? Because it is written, "with unleavened bread and bitter herbs they shall eat it" (Numbers 9:11): when there is a Passover offering, yes; when there is no Passover offering, no. But matzah too is written there, "with unleavened bread and bitter herbs they shall eat it"? The verse repeated it: "in the evening you shall eat unleavened bread." And Rav Acha bar Yaakov said: both this and that are rabbinic; but is it not written, "in the evening you shall eat unleavened bread"? That is needed for one who is impure or on a distant journey. The priests fulfill their obligation with the showbread. This is obvious; but lest you say we require matzah equal to every person, it teaches us "matzot, matzot" repeatedly to multiply the cases.

"Until the twenty-first day." Rav Ashi said: This that you say, that there must be a night and a day from the month — from where do we derive it? Rabbi Yochanan said: from "from evening to evening you shall keep your rest" (Leviticus 23:32). Reish Lakish said: from "until the twenty-first day of the month in the evening." What is the difference between them? Midnight is the difference between them. It has been taught: "from the first day until the seventh day" — one might think the first but not the first included, the seventh but not the seventh included, in the manner that it is said "from his head to his feet" (Leviticus 13:12), his head but not his head included, his feet but not his feet included. Scripture therefore says, "until the twenty-first day of the month in the evening." Rabbi says: it is unnecessary; "first" means the first is included, "seventh" means the seventh is included.

"Seven days leaven shall not be found in your houses" (Exodus 12:19-20). From this I know only "shall not be found"; "shall not be seen," from where? Scripture says, "And leaven shall not be seen with you" (Exodus 13:7). I know only leaven, which is under "shall not be seen" and "shall not be found"; chametz, from where? Scripture says, "And no chametz shall be seen with you, and no leaven shall be seen in all your border" — it compared leaven to chametz and chametz to leaven: just as this is under "shall not be seen," so is that; just as this is under "shall not be found," so is that; just as this is of the five species, so is that of the five species. "In your houses." Why is this said? Because it says "in all your border," I might understand it literally. Scripture says "in your houses": just as your house is in your domain, so your border is in your domain — this excludes an Israelite's chametz in a gentile's domain, which, though he could destroy it, is not in his domain; and it excludes a gentile's chametz in an Israelite's domain, and chametz upon which a rockfall has come, which, though in his domain, he cannot destroy. You say it comes for this; or does it not come only to teach that in houses it is seven days but in the borders forever? Scripture says, "And leaven shall not be seen with you" (Deuteronomy 16:4): just as in houses seven days, so in the borders seven days. "For whoever eats anything leavened shall be cut off." Why is this said? Because it says, "for whoever eats leaven," I would know only chametz, for which one is liable to excision; leaven, from where? Scripture says, "for whoever eats anything leavened." Before this is stated I might reason it out: if chametz, which does not leaven others, carries liability to excision, then leaven, which leavens others, surely should. No — you might say that of chametz, which is fit to eat, but of leaven, which is not fit to eat, one would not be liable. Scripture therefore says, "for whoever eats anything leavened shall be cut off." And one is cut off; excision means nothing other than cutting off. "That soul from the congregation of Israel." I might understand it is cut off from the congregation of Israel and goes off to another people; Scripture says "from before Me" (Leviticus 22:3) — in every place He is in My domain. "The stranger and the native of the land": because this case concerns Israel, it is necessary to include the converts; so too in every place where a matter concerns Israel, it is necessary to include the converts.

It has been taught otherwise: "Leaven shall not be found in your houses" — what does Scripture teach? Because it says, "And no chametz shall be seen with you, and no leaven shall be seen with you," your own you may not see, but you may see that of others and that of the Sanctuary. One might think one may hide it away or accept deposits from gentiles; Scripture says, "shall not be found." From this I know only a gentile whom you have subdued and who dwells with you in the courtyard; a gentile whom you have not subdued and who does not dwell with you in the courtyard, from where? Scripture says, "shall not be found in your houses" — in any case. From this I know only houses; pits, ditches, and caves, from where? Scripture says, "in all your border." And still I might say: in houses one transgresses under "shall not be seen," "shall not be found," "shall not hide it," and "shall not accept deposits," but in the borders, your own you may not see, yet you may see that of others and of the Sanctuary. From where do we apply what is said of one to the other and of the other to this? Scripture says "leaven, leaven" for a verbal analogy: leaven is stated regarding houses and leaven is stated regarding borders, and so on. Rava said: in truth, do not reverse it; it stands upon the opening clause — your own you may not see, but you may see that of others and of the Sanctuary. From this I know only a gentile whom you have not subdued, and so on, until Scripture says, "shall not be found." This teacher returns from the permission and takes the verse for prohibition, because of the doubled "with you, with you." The master said: one might think one may hide it away; Scripture says, "shall not be found." But you said at the outset, you may see that of others. This is no difficulty: this case is where he accepted responsibility for it, and that case where he did not, as Rava said to the people of Mechoza, and so on. The Rabbis taught: a gentile who entered the courtyard of an Israelite with his dough in his hand, the Israelite need not destroy it; but if he deposited it with him, he must destroy it, as it says, "shall not be found." Rav Papa said: it stands on the opening clause. Rav Ashi said: it stands on the closing clause, as it says, "shall not be found" — and this is not his own; and even though hire does not effect acquisition, here it is different, since the Merciful One expressed it in the language of "shall not be found," meaning whatever is found in his hand — this excludes that which is not found in his hand, for that corner is lent to the gentile.

The House of Shammai say: leaven in the volume of an olive, and chametz in the volume of a date. And the House of Hillel say: both this and that in the volume of an olive. What is the reasoning of the House of Shammai? If so, let the Merciful One write "chametz" and not require "leaven," and I would have said: if chametz, whose leavening is not severe, is at an olive's volume, then leaven, whose leavening is severe, all the more so. Why then did the Merciful One write "leaven"? To tell you that the measure of this is not like the measure of that. And the House of Hillel: both are necessary. For if the Merciful One had written only "leaven," I would say it is because its leavening is severe, but chametz, whose leavening is not severe, say no. And if He had written only "chametz," I would say it is because it is fit to eat, but leaven, which is not fit to eat, say no. Therefore He teaches us both. And the House of Shammai do not hold that which Rabbi Zeira said: the verse opened with leaven and concluded with chametz, to tell you this is leaven and this is chametz. As to eating, all agree they do not differ; where they differ is as to removal. The House of Shammai hold we do not derive removal from eating, and the House of Hillel hold we do. "You shall eat nothing leavened" and so on. Why is this said? Because it says, "for whoever eats anything leavened shall be cut off," from this I know only chametz; its mixture, from where? Scripture says, "You shall eat nothing leavened."

"You shall eat nothing leavened" (Exodus 12:20) comes to include the Babylonian kutach, the Median beer, the Edomite vinegar, and the Egyptian zithom (fermented foods of the surrounding nations). One might think a person is liable to karet (being cut off) for these as well; therefore Scripture teaches, "For whoever eats what is leavened, that soul shall be cut off" (Exodus 12:19): for leaven made of pure grain one is liable to karet, but for its mixture with other foods one transgresses only a negative commandment. These are the words of Rabbi Eliezer. But the Sages say: for its mixture there is no penalty at all. From where does Rabbi Eliezer derive that the mixture carries a negative commandment? Because it is written, "You shall eat nothing leavened." If so, let one be liable to karet for it too, for it is written, "Whoever eats what is leavened shall be cut off." That verse, "leavened," is needed for what was taught: I know only of leaven that became leavened on its own; from where do I learn of dough leavened by another substance? Scripture teaches, "leavened." If so, the negative commandment came only for that purpose. Rather, Rabbi Eliezer's reasoning is derived from the word "all" [the inclusive "kol"]. But by the karet verse "all" is also written. That "all" is needed to include women. Women are derived from what Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav: "a man or a woman who commits any sin" (Numbers 5:6) shows that Scripture equated woman to man for all penalties in the Torah. The verse was nonetheless required, for you might have thought: since it is written, "You shall eat no leavened bread with it" (Deuteronomy 16:3), whoever is bound by the positive command "eat matzah" is bound by "do not eat leaven," and since women are not bound by the positive command to eat matzah (it being a time-bound positive commandment), I might say they are not bound by "do not eat leaven" either; therefore Scripture teaches us that they are. And now that they are included in the prohibition of leaven, they are likewise included in the eating of matzah, in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer, who said: women are obligated to eat matzah by Torah law, as it says, "You shall eat no leavened bread with it for seven days," for whoever is bound by "do not eat leaven" is bound by "eat matzah." And what did you see to use "all" to include women? Say it includes the mixture. It stands to reason: a verse dealing with eaters includes eaters; a verse dealing with eaters does not extend to things eaten. Yet was it not taught regarding "whoever eats fat" (Leviticus 7:25): I know only the fat of unblemished animals fit for offering; from where the fat of blemished animals? Scripture teaches, "whoever eats fat"; from where the fat of non-sacred animals? Scripture teaches, "for whoever" - here a verse dealing with eaters does extend to things eaten? There, where there are no further eaters to include, it extends to things eaten; here, where there are eaters to include, it does not abandon eaters to include things eaten. And the Sages, who hold there is no liability for a mixture, do not expound "all"; from where do they include women? "All" we do not expound, "for all" we do expound. And Rabbi Eliezer - say "all" includes women and "for all" includes the mixture. And should you say Rabbi Eliezer does not expound "for all," was it not taught regarding "for no leaven and no honey shall you burn" (Leviticus 2:11): I know only the whole of it; from where a part of it? Scripture teaches "all"; from where a mixture? Scripture teaches "for all"? Whom did you hear expounding "all"? Rabbi Eliezer - and he expounds "for all" too. This is a difficulty. (It is written in remez 504.)

"In all your dwellings you shall eat matzah" (Exodus 12:20). Why is this said? Because it says, "You shall eat before the LORD your God... the tithe of your grain" (Deuteronomy 14:23). One might hear that if a person brought the second tithe up to Jerusalem, he could fulfill his obligation of matzah with it. And from where do we learn that he does not fulfill it with the showbread, nor with the remnants of meal offerings, nor with the loaves of a thanksgiving offering, nor with a nazirite's wafers, nor with first fruits? Scripture teaches, "In all your dwellings you shall eat matzah" - excluding these, which are not eaten in all dwellings. I might then exclude these but bring in the sponge cakes, the honey cakes, the iskaritin (a light fried batter), the cake of soaked dough, and the ashishah (a rich pressed cake). Scripture teaches, "bread of affliction" (Deuteronomy 16:3) - excluding these, which are not bread of affliction. These are the words of Rabbi Ishmael. But the Sages say: one fulfills the obligation with them and with the second tithe; and what does "bread of affliction" teach? That he should not knead it with wine, nor with oil, nor with any other liquid, but moisten it from all of them only on its surface. Rabbi Eliezer says: one fulfills it with them and with the second tithe; and what does "bread of affliction" teach? Just as a poor man's bread the whole year round - his wife kneads and he heats the oven - so too the matzah, his wife kneads and he heats the oven. Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: behold it says, "You shall eat no leavened bread with it for seven days"; I might hear that even second tithe is included; therefore Scripture teaches, "bread of affliction" - excluding second tithe, which is eaten only in joy.

One might think a person could fulfill his obligation with tevel (untithed produce) that was not fully prepared, from which the poor man's tithe had not been taken. Scripture teaches, "You shall eat no leavened bread with it" (Deuteronomy 16:3): one whose prohibition is on account of "do not eat leaven" - this excludes that whose prohibition is on account of "do not eat tevel." One might think a person could fulfill his obligation with second tithe in Jerusalem; Scripture teaches, "bread of affliction" - that which is eaten in affliction, excluding this which is eaten not in affliction but in joy. These are the words of Rabbi Yose the Galilean. Rabbi Akiva says: "matzot, matzot" - the repetition is an inclusion; if so, what does "bread of affliction" teach? It excludes dough kneaded with wine, oil, and honey. What is Rabbi Akiva's reasoning? Is "oni" (with a full vav, meaning rich speech) written? "Oni" (affliction) is written. And Rabbi Yose the Galilean - is it read "oni" (affliction)? It is read "oni" (the other vocalization). And Rabbi Akiva: that it is read the latter way accords with Shmuel, who said, "bread of affliction" means bread over which many words are recited [the bread of the Haggadah]; and this applies on the first festival day, but on the second day they may knead with honey, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi told his sons: "On the first day do not knead for me with honey; from then on, knead for me with honey." One might think a person could fulfill his obligation with first fruits. Scripture teaches, "In all your dwellings you shall eat matzah" - matzah eaten in all dwellings, excluding first fruits, which are eaten only in Jerusalem. These are the words of Rabbi Yose the Galilean. Rabbi Akiva says: I might think I should exclude even second tithe; Scripture teaches "matzot, matzot" as an inclusion. What did you see to include second tithe and exclude first fruits? I include second tithe, which has a permitted use in all dwellings, as Rabbi Elazar said: from where do we learn that second tithe that became defiled may be redeemed even in Jerusalem? Scripture teaches, "for you are not able to carry it" (Deuteronomy 14:24), and "carrying" means only eating, as it says, "and he carried portions to them from before himself" (Genesis 43:34). And Rabbi Yose the Galilean derives it from "bread of affliction": that which is eaten in affliction, excluding this which is eaten in joy; he holds like Rabbi Shimon, who said first fruits are permitted to an onen (a mourner before burial). The Rabbis taught: "bread of affliction" excludes a scalded cake and the ashishah. One might think one fulfills the obligation only with coarse bran bread; Scripture teaches "matzot, matzot" as an inclusion - even bread as fine as Solomon's matzah suffices. Why does the Merciful One write "dwellings" by matzah? It was necessary, for you might have thought: since it is written, "they shall eat it with matzah and bitter herbs" (Numbers 9:11), in a time when there is a Passover offering, yes, but when there is no Passover offering, no; Scripture teaches us otherwise. "And Moses called all the elders of Israel" (Exodus 12:21). This tells that he made them a court. "And he said to them": the speech was from Moses' mouth, to be told to all Israel. These are the words of Rabbi Yoshiyah. Rabbi Yonatan says: the speech was from Moses' mouth to be told to the elders, and the elders to tell all Israel. Rabbi Yoshiyah said to him: how is this speech different from all the speeches in the Torah, where the speech is from Moses' mouth to be told to all Israel? And what does "and he said to them" teach? Only that Moses gave honor to the elders. And so the Holy One, blessed be He, told him: give honor to the elders, as it says, "Go and gather the elders of Israel" (Exodus 3:16); and so Moses and Aaron did, "and they gathered all the elders of the children of Israel" (Exodus 4:29). "Draw out and take for yourselves sheep" (Exodus 12:21). "Draw out" - one who has; "and take" - one who has not. Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: draw your hands away from idolatry and cling to the commandments. Rabbi Ishmael says: Scripture comes to teach you that one may always be counted upon a Passover offering and withdraw from it until it is slaughtered, provided he does not leave the Passover offering as it is without takers. Rabbi Yitzhak says: Scripture comes to teach concerning small livestock that it is acquired by drawing. "And slaughter the Passover." It is a commandment to slaughter it for its own sake; but if he slaughtered it not for its own sake, he transgressed the commandment. One might think it is still valid; Scripture teaches, "draw out and take" - Scripture repeats it to disqualify. From here they said: all sacrifices slaughtered not for their own sake are valid, except that they do not count for the owners as fulfillment of obligation, apart from the Passover offering and the sin offering.

"And you shall take a bundle of hyssop" (Exodus 12:22). From here you derive a rule for all the takings in the Torah: since takings are stated in the Torah without specification, and Scripture detailed for you in one of them that it is none other than a bundle, I apply to all the takings in the Torah that they are bundles. "Hyssop" - and not Greek hyssop, nor Roman hyssop, nor wilderness hyssop, nor any hyssop that has a qualifying name (a different species bearing the name "hyssop of such-and-such"). "And dip it in the blood that is in the basin" - that there should be in the blood enough for dipping. "That is in the basin" (saf): Scripture tells that one hollows out and carves a basin beside the threshold and slaughters into it; and "saf" means nothing other than the threshold. "From the blood that is in the basin" - why is this said? Has it not already said, "and dip it in the blood that is in the basin"? Because it says, "and they shall take of the blood and put it," I might hear one dipping for them all; therefore Scripture teaches, "and you shall touch the lintel and the two doorposts" - for every touching, a dipping.

"And none of you shall go out from the door of his house until morning" (Exodus 12:22). As it says, "Come, my people, enter your chambers" (Isaiah 26:20) - to teach you that one should enter while it is still good light and go out while it is good light. And so you find that the patriarchs and the prophets conducted themselves in the way of the world (proper conduct). As it says, "And Abraham rose early in the morning" (Genesis 22:3); "And Jacob rose early in the morning"; "And Moses rose early in the morning" (Exodus 34:4); "And Samuel rose early to meet Saul in the morning" (1 Samuel 15:12). And these matters are an argument from minor to major: if the patriarchs and the prophets, who went to do the will of the One who spoke and the world came into being, conducted themselves in the way of the world, how much more so all other people. And so it says, "You make darkness and it is night... the young lions roar after their prey... You give to them, they gather it in" (Psalms 104:20-21,28). And it says, "The sun rises, they are gathered in" - from then onward, "man goes out to his labor" (Psalms 104:22-23). And it says, "How manifold are Your works, O LORD; in wisdom You made them all" (Psalms 104:24).

Rav Yosef taught: what is the meaning of what is written, "And none of you shall go out" (Exodus 12:22)? From here we learn that once permission has been given to the Destroyer, it no longer distinguishes between the righteous and the wicked. And not only that, but it begins with the righteous first, as it says, "And I will cut off from you the righteous and the wicked" (Ezekiel 21:8). When Rav Yosef reached this verse he would weep, saying: all this too [the righteous] are reckoned as nothing. Abaye said to him: it is a kindness toward them, as it is written, "For the righteous is taken away from before the evil" (Isaiah 57:1) - he is gathered in before the calamity comes. A person should always enter while it is good light, and so on. The Rabbis taught: if there is plague in the city, gather in your feet (stay home), as it says, "And none of you shall go out," and it says, "Come, my people, enter your chambers and shut your door behind you; hide yourself for a little moment until the wrath passes by" (Isaiah 26:20). And it says, "Outside the sword bereaves, and in the chambers, terror" (Deuteronomy 32:25). What does "and it says" add? Should you say these words apply only at night but not by day - come and learn: "Come, my people, enter your chambers." And should you say these words apply only where there is no terror within, but where there is terror within, going about among people in company is better - come and learn: "Outside the sword bereaves" - even though within the chambers there is terror, outside the sword bereaves.

"And the LORD will pass through to strike Egypt" (Exodus 12:23). Rabbi Yehudah says: like a king who passes from place to place.

Another interpretation: "I place My wrath (evrah) and My terror upon Egypt" - evrah means nothing other than fury, and so on. "And He will see the blood" - is not everything revealed before Him? And so on. "And the LORD will pass over the door" (Exodus 12:23). And these matters are an argument from minor to major: if the blood of the Passover in Egypt, which is the lighter case - for it lasted only for the moment, and does not apply by day and by night, and does not apply for the generations - yet of it is written, "He will not allow the Destroyer to enter," then the mezuzah, which is the weightier case - for it contains the special divine Name ten times, and applies by day and by night, and applies for all generations - how much more so that He will not allow the Destroyer to enter. And what brought it about (that protection should ever fail)? Our iniquities, as it says, "Your iniquities have turned these away" (Jeremiah 5:25). And it says, "But your iniquities have separated" (Isaiah 59:2). "And you shall keep this matter" (Exodus 12:24) - to bring the Passover of the generations, that one shall bring it only from the lambs and from the goats. It is written, "as a statute for you and for your children forever." Why is this said? Because it says, "and they shall take of the blood," I might hear that even the women are included; therefore Scripture teaches, "as a statute for you and for your children" - the men, but not the women.

"And it shall come to pass, when you come to the land" (Exodus 12:25). Scripture made this service depend on the time from their entry into the land and onward. "As He has spoken" (Exodus 12:25). And where did He speak? "And I will bring you to the land which I lifted My hand" to give, and so forth (Exodus 6:8). Similarly: "This is what the LORD has spoken: a day of rest" (Exodus 16:23); and where did He speak? "And it shall be on the sixth day, that they shall prepare" and so forth (Exodus 16:5). Similarly: "This is what the LORD spoke, saying, Through those near to Me I will be sanctified" (Leviticus 10:3); and where did He speak? "And there I will meet with the children of Israel" (Exodus 29:43). Similarly: "The dread of you and the fear of you the LORD your God shall put," and so forth (Deuteronomy 11:25); and where did He speak? "I will send My terror before you" (Exodus 23:27). Similarly: "When the LORD your God enlarges your border," and so forth (Deuteronomy 12:20); and where did He speak? "For I will drive out nations before you and enlarge your border" (Exodus 34:24). Similarly: "For the LORD your God has blessed you," and so forth (Deuteronomy 15:6); and where did He speak? "You shall be blessed above all the peoples" (Deuteronomy 7:14). Similarly: "And the LORD has affirmed you this day" (Deuteronomy 26:18); and where did He speak? "You have affirmed the LORD this day," and so forth (Deuteronomy 26:17). Similarly: "And to set you on high above all," and so forth; and where did He speak? "And the LORD will set you as the head," and so forth (Deuteronomy 28:13). Similarly: "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O earth" (Isaiah 1:2); and where did He speak? "Give ear, O heavens, and I will speak" (Deuteronomy 32:1). Similarly: "And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and they shall see," and so forth; and where did He speak? "See now that I, I am He" (Deuteronomy 32:39). Similarly: "If you are willing and obey, but if you refuse and rebel" (Isaiah 1:19-20); and where did He speak? "And I will bring upon you a sword," and so forth (Leviticus 26:25). Similarly: "He will swallow up death forever," and so forth (Isaiah 25:8); and where did He speak? "I kill and I make alive," and so forth (Deuteronomy 32:39). Similarly: "Then you shall take delight in the LORD" (Isaiah 58:14); and where did He speak? "He made him ride on the high places of the earth" (Deuteronomy 32:13). Similarly: "Behold, it comes and it is done, says the LORD" (Ezekiel 39:8); and where did He speak? "I will make My arrows drunk with blood" (Deuteronomy 32:42). Similarly: "And they shall sit, each under his vine and under his fig tree" (Micah 4:4); and where did He speak? "And I will give peace in the land," and so forth (Leviticus 26:6). Similarly: "And there shall be no survivor to the house of Esau" (Obadiah 1:18); and where did He speak? "One out of Jacob shall have dominion and destroy the survivor of the city" (Numbers 24:19). Similarly: "And the LORD remembered Sarah as He had said" (Genesis 21:1); and where did He say it? "But Sarah your wife shall bear," and so forth (Genesis 17:19). Similarly: "And the LORD did to Sarah as He had spoken" (Genesis 21:1); and where did He speak? "On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram" (Genesis 15:18). Similarly: "And I will sell your sons" (Joel 4:8); and where did He speak? "And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant" and so forth (Genesis 9:25). Similarly: "And the LORD has said to you, You shall not return again"; and where did He say it? "For as you have seen the Egyptians" (Exodus 14:13). Similarly: "The wolf and the lamb shall feed together" (Isaiah 65:25); and where did He speak? "And I will remove evil beasts" (Leviticus 26:6). Similarly: "From the nations of whom the LORD said, You shall not go among them" (1 Kings 11:2); and where did He say it? "And you shall not intermarry with them" (Deuteronomy 7:3). Similarly: "Then Solomon said" (1 Kings 8:12); and where did He say it? "For in the cloud I will appear over the cover" (Leviticus 16:2). Similarly: "And they shall be Mine, says the LORD" (Malachi 3:17); and where did He say it? "And you shall be My treasured possession" (Exodus 19:5). Similarly: "All who are called by My name," and so forth (Isaiah 43:7); and where did He speak? "And all the peoples of the earth shall see," and so forth (Deuteronomy 28:10). Similarly: "And I will also take of them for priests," and so forth (Isaiah 66:21); and where did He speak? "The hidden things belong to the LORD our God" (Deuteronomy 29:28).

"And it shall come to pass, when your children say to you" (Exodus 12:26). At that hour Israel received bad tidings, that in the end the Torah was destined to be forgotten. And some say they received good tidings, that they would see children and children's children. "And the people bowed down and worshiped" (Exodus 12:27). Why did they bow? Because it is said, "And the children of Israel went up armed" (Exodus 13:18), meaning one out of five; and some say one out of fifty; and some say one out of five hundred. Rabbi Nehorai says: By the Temple service! Not even one out of five hundred went up, as it is said, "A myriad, like the growth of the field," and so forth (Ezekiel 16:7), and it says, "And the children of Israel were fruitful and swarmed" (Exodus 1:7), for a woman would bear six in a single womb; and yet you say that one out of five hundred went up. And when did they die? During the three days of darkness, as it is said, "They did not see one another" (Exodus 10:23), for they were burying their dead, and they gave thanks and praise that their enemies did not see their downfall and rejoice. "And you shall say, It is the sacrifice of the LORD's Passover" (Exodus 12:27). Our Rabbis taught: All sacrifices that were slaughtered not for their own sake are valid, except that they do not count for the owners as fulfillment of their obligation, apart from the Passover offering and the sin offering. And the Passover, from where do we learn it? As it is written, "Observe the month of Abib, and keep the Passover" (Deuteronomy 16:1), meaning that all your doing of it shall be for the sake of the Passover. We have thus found a change of designation; a change of owners, from where do we learn it? "And you shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Passover," meaning that the slaughtering shall be for the sake of the Passover; if this verse is not needed for the matter of a change of designation, since that is derived from elsewhere, apply it to the matter of a change of owners. We have found this as a precept; that it is indispensable, from where do we learn it? "It is" indicates that it is indispensable, both here and there. We have found this regarding slaughtering; the other rites, from where do we learn them? Since it was revealed in one case, it is revealed in all. Rav Ashi said: We do not say "since it was revealed in one, it is revealed in all"; rather, from where do we learn it? As it is written, "This is the law of the burnt offering, of the meal offering," and so forth (Leviticus 7:37), and it was taught: "On the day He commanded" (Leviticus 7:38), this refers to the firstborn, the tithe, and the Passover, which Scripture compared to peace offerings: just as with peace offerings, whether a change of designation or a change of owners, it is a precept, so too with all of them, whether a change of designation or a change of owners, we require it as a precept; and as with peace offerings, just as you did not distinguish in them between slaughtering and the other rites regarding the precept, so too with the Passover you shall not distinguish in it between slaughtering and the other rites as indispensable. And then why do I need "it"? For that which was taught: Wherever "it" is stated regarding slaughtering, it serves only to make it indispensable; but regarding the guilt offering, "it" is stated only after the burning of the fat portions, meaning the offering itself is valid even if its fat portions were not burned.

Rabban Gamliel says: Whoever has not said these three things on Passover has not fulfilled his obligation, and these are they: Pesach, Matzah, and Maror. The Pesach offering, on account of what? On account of the fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, passed over the houses of our fathers in Egypt, as it is said, "And you shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Passover," and so forth (Exodus 12:27). This bitter herb, Maror, on account of what? On account of the fact that the Egyptians embittered the lives of our fathers in Egypt, as it is said, "And they made their lives bitter with hard labor," and so forth (Exodus 1:14). This Matzah, on account of what? On account of the fact that they were redeemed, as it is said, "And they baked the dough," and so forth (Exodus 12:39). Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: Israel was fit for destruction in Egypt until the last one finished his Passover offering, as it is said, "And you shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Passover," and so forth. This teaches you that anyone who sees and hears the miracles that the Holy One, blessed be He, performed for Israel must give praise and thanksgiving, as it is said, "And Moses recounted to his father-in-law," "And Jethro rejoiced," "And Jethro said, Blessed be the LORD" (Exodus 18:8-10).

"And the children of Israel went and did" (Exodus 12:28). This is to give reward for the doing and reward for the going. "And they did." But had they already done it? Rather, from here we learn that they took it upon themselves to do it, and the Omnipresent reckoned it for them as though they had already done it. "As the LORD commanded Moses and Aaron, so they did." This is to make known the praise of Israel: that just as Moses and Aaron told them, so they did. Another interpretation: What does the verse teach by saying "so they did"? Rather, that Moses and Aaron also did so.

"And it was at midnight" (Exodus 12:29). Their Creator divided it. Why is this said? Because elsewhere it says, "And Moses said, Thus says the LORD, About midnight" (Exodus 11:4). But is it possible for flesh and blood to determine the exact middle of the night? Rather, from here we learn that their Creator divided it. Rabbi Judah ben Beteira says: He who knows His hours and His times divided it. Rabbi Eliezer says: "Night" is stated here and "night" is stated elsewhere; just as the night stated here is until midnight, so the night stated elsewhere is until midnight. "And the LORD struck." I might understand by means of an angel or by means of a messenger; therefore Scripture says, "And I will strike every firstborn" (Exodus 12:12), not by means of an angel and not by means of a messenger. "And the LORD struck every firstborn." Even the firstborn of Egypt who were in other places, from where do we know? Scripture says, "To Him who struck Egypt through their firstborn" (Psalms 136:10). The firstborn of Ham, Put, Cush, and Lud, from where? Scripture says, "And He struck every firstborn in Egypt, the first of their strength in the tents of Ham" (Psalms 78:51). "From the firstborn of Pharaoh." Scripture comes to teach you about Pharaoh, that he himself was a firstborn. Or perhaps Scripture comes only to teach about his son, that he was a firstborn? When it says "who sat on his throne," his son is already mentioned; so what does Scripture teach by "from the firstborn of Pharaoh"? It comes to teach about Pharaoh, that he himself was a firstborn, and he was spared from among all the firstborn, and concerning him Scripture says, "But for this very purpose I have raised you up" (Exodus 9:16). Baal Zephon was spared from among all the objects of worship, in order to entice the heart of the Egyptians; concerning it He says, "He makes nations great and destroys them" (Job 12:23). "To the firstborn of the captive." But what sin had the captives committed? Rather, so that the captives would not say, "Their object of worship brought the punishment upon them; mighty is our god that it stood by itself, mighty is our god that the punishment did not rule over us." This teaches you that whatever decrees Pharaoh decreed against Israel, the captives rejoiced in them; and concerning them Scripture says, "He who rejoices at calamity shall not go unpunished" (Proverbs 17:5), and it says, "When your enemy falls, do not rejoice," and so forth (Proverbs 24:17). And it is written, "Son of man, because Tyre said against Jerusalem, Aha" (Ezekiel 26:2), what does it say? "Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up nations against you" (Ezekiel 26:3). And not only captives, but even male and female slaves, as it is said, "to the firstborn of the maidservant" (Exodus 11:5). "And every firstborn of beast." But what sin had the beast committed? Rather, so that the Egyptians would not say, "Our object of worship brought the punishment upon us; mighty is our god that it stood by itself, and the punishment did not rule over it."

"And Pharaoh rose at night" (Exodus 12:30). I might understand at the third hour, for it is the way of kings to rise at the third hour; therefore Scripture says "at night." If "at night," I might understand by means of his ministers and ladies; therefore Scripture says "he and all his servants and all Egypt." This tells that Pharaoh went around to all the houses of his servants and all the houses of Egypt and raised up each and every one from his place. "And there was a great cry in Egypt," as in the matter that is said, "And there shall be a great cry" (Exodus 11:6). "For there was no house," and so forth. Rabbi Nathan says: But was there no house there that had no firstborn? Rather, since the firstborn of one of them had died, he would make an image of him and set it up in his house; and on that day it was ground down and crushed and scattered, and that day was as grievous in their eyes as the day they buried him. And not only that, but the Egyptians used to bury within their houses, and the dogs would enter through the burial niches and dig out and bring forth the firstborn from their niches and toy with them, and it was as grievous in their eyes as though on that day they buried them.

"And he called for Moses and Aaron at night" (Exodus 12:31). This tells that Pharaoh went around and asked throughout all the land of Egypt, "Where does Moses dwell? Where does Aaron dwell?" "And he said, Rise, go out." Moses said to him: We are warned not to go out except in the open, by day, as it is said, "And you shall not go out, any of you, from the door of his house until morning" (Exodus 12:22). Another interpretation: "And he called for Moses and Aaron," why is it said? Because it says, "And Pharaoh said to him, Get away from me," and so forth, "And Moses said, You have spoken well" (Exodus 10:28-29), meaning, you have spoken rightly, you have spoken in its proper time, "I will not see your face again." But Moses had said, "And all these your servants shall come down to me" (Exodus 11:8). Since Scripture should only have said that in the end Pharaoh himself was destined to come down first, why did Moses speak of the servants? Because Moses gave honor to the kingship. "And the people bowed down and worshiped" (Exodus 12:27), as is written in remez 178.

Our Rabbis taught: In all those forty years that Israel was in the wilderness, there was not a day on which a north wind did not blow at midnight, as it is said, "And it was at midnight, and the LORD struck every firstborn." What is the scriptural teaching? It comes to teach us that a time of favor is a real thing. "And he called for Moses and Aaron at night and said, Rise, go out." Pharaoh would go about at night and circle through every market, saying, "Where is Moses, and where does he dwell?" And the children of Israel would mock him and say to him, "Pharaoh, where are you going?" And he would say to them, "I am seeking Moses." And they would say, "He dwells here," and they would mock him, until he stood over him. He said, "Rise, go out from among my people." Moses said to him: Are we thieves? The Holy One, blessed be He, says to us, "You shall not go out, any of you, from the door of his house until morning" (Exodus 12:22). He said to him: Please, I beg you, rise and go out. Moses said to him: Why do you trouble yourself so much? He said to him: Because I am a firstborn, I am afraid that I may die. Moses said to him: Do not be afraid; you are destined for something greater than this. And do not say that Pharaoh alone was pressing them, but all Egypt was pressing them, as it is said, "And the Egyptians were urgent" (Exodus 12:33). The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: By your lives, none of you will die here, but in the sea. Why did they not all die in the plague of the firstborn but rather in the sea? Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani said: With cunning the Egyptians came upon Israel. They said: If we enslave them with fire, their God can bring fire upon us from above, just as He brought upon the people of Sodom; rather, He swore that He would not bring a flood, so come and let us enslave them with water. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them: I swore that I would not bring a flood again upon the world; by your lives, those men go to the flood, as it is said, "They shall be poured out by the power of the sword" (Psalms 63:11), those men are dragged along and go of themselves to the sea. "They shall be a portion for foxes" (Psalms 63:11). Solomon said, "Seize for us the foxes" (Song of Songs 2:15), as is written in remez 86.

"Rise, go out" (Exodus 12:31). This teaches that Pharaoh was knocking on the door of Moses and Aaron. They said to him, "You fool! Do we go out at night? Are we thieves? We go out in the morning." He said, "But behold, all Egypt has died, as it is said (below, verse 33), 'For they said, We are all dead men.'" They said to him, "And do you wish to end this plague upon you? Then say, 'Behold, you are your own masters, behold, you are the servants of the Holy One, blessed be He.'" Pharaoh began to shout, "In the past you were my servants, but now behold, you are free men, behold, you are your own masters! You must give praise to the Holy One, blessed be He, that you are His servants, as it is said (Psalms 113:1), 'Halleluyah, praise, O servants of the LORD.'" "You yourself shall also give into our hands" (this is written in [reference] 92). "Rise, go out" (Exodus 12:31): I said, "Who and who are the ones going?" and you say (verse 9), "With our young and with our old" and so forth. "Rise, go out": I said (verse 24), "Let your flocks and your herds be left," and you say, "Our cattle also shall go with us" (verse 32). "Both your flocks and your herds, take." You say (verse 25), "You also shall give into our hands": take, as you have spoken, and go, and bless me also: pray for me, so that the punishment may cease from me. "And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people" (Exodus 12:33). This tells that they were terrifying them and pressing them to leave. "For they said, We are all dead men." They said: not according to the decree of Moses. Moses said (Exodus 11:5), "And every firstborn shall die," and they supposed that one who has four or five sons, only one of them would die, the firstborn among them. But they did not know that their wives were suspected of forbidden relations, and that they were all firstborn from other bachelors. They had acted in secret, and the Omnipresent publicized them openly. And behold, this is an argument from minor to major [a fortiori]: if in the measure of punishment, which is the lesser, the One who acts in secret the Omnipresent publicizes openly, how much more so for the measure of goodness, which is the greater.

"And the people took their dough before it was leavened" (Exodus 12:34). This tells that they kneaded the dough but did not manage to leaven it before they were redeemed. And likewise you find for the time to come, what does it say (Hosea 7:4), "He shall cease from the city, from the kneading of the dough until it is leavened." "Their kneading troughs": these are the remnants of matzah and bitter herb. Or perhaps it is rather the remnants of the Passover offerings? When it says (above, verse 10), "And you shall not leave any of it until the morning," behold, the remnants of the Passover offerings are already spoken of. What then does Scripture teach by saying "their kneading troughs"? These are the remnants of matzah and bitter herb. "Bound up in their garments" (Exodus 12:34). Rabbi Nathan says: was there no cattle there? Has it not already been said, "And a mixed multitude also went up with them" and so forth? What then does Scripture teach by saying "bound up in their garments upon their shoulders"? Rather, it teaches that Israel cherished the commandments. "And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses" (Exodus 12:35). And what did Moses say to Israel in Egypt? Behold, it says (Exodus 11:2), "Speak now in the ears of the people," and the children of Israel did so, and they asked of the Egyptians vessels of silver and vessels of gold and garments. For there is no need for Scripture to say "garments," but from here we learn that clothing was more cherished by them than the silver and the gold, for the last item is the most cherished.

"And the LORD gave the people favor" and so forth, "and they lent them" (Exodus 12:36). According to its plain meaning: a man had no sooner said "Lend me" than the other brought it out and gave it to him; these are the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Yose the Galilean says: they trusted them from the three days of darkness, for they would say, "If at the time when we were in darkness and they were in light, they were not suspected of theft, how much less now would they be suspected?" Rabbi Eliezer says: the Holy Spirit rested upon them, and an Israelite would say to an Egyptian, "Lend me your vessel that is laid up for you in such and such a place," and the other would bring it out and give it to him. And "favor" means nothing other than the Holy Spirit, as it is said (Zechariah 12:10), "And I will pour upon the house of David a spirit of favor and supplications." Rabbi Nathan says: there is no need to say "and they lent them," but rather what they did not even ask for, the Egyptians would lend them; and thus an Israelite would say, "Give me a certain object," and the Egyptian would say to him, "Take this for yourself, and another like it." "And they despoiled the Egyptians" (Exodus 12:36). This tells that their idolatry was melted down and annulled and reverted to its original raw state. And from where do we learn that the plunder at the Sea was greater than the plunder of Egypt? As it is said, "And you increased and grew great and came into excellent ornaments [adi adayim]" (Ezekiel 16:7). "Adi" is the plunder of Egypt, "adayim" is the plunder of the Sea. (Psalms 68:14) "The wings of a dove covered with silver," this is the plunder of Egypt; "and her feathers with yellow gold," this is the plunder of the Sea. (Song of Songs 1:11) "We will make you rows of gold," this is the plunder of the Sea; "with studs of silver," this is the plunder of Egypt.

"And they lent them" (Exodus 12:36). This teaches that they lent to them against their will. Some say: against the will of the Egyptians, as it is written (Psalms 68:13), "And she that tarries at home divides the spoil." And some say: against the will of Israel, on account of the burden [of carrying so much]. "And they despoiled Egypt." Rabbi Assi said: they made it like a deep [pool] that has no fish in it. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: like a trap that has no grain in it.

"And the children of Israel journeyed from Ramses to Succoth" (Exodus 12:37). From Ramses to Succoth is a distance of forty parsangs. The voice of Moses traveled a distance of forty days' [journey]. And do not be astonished, for behold, it says (Exodus 9:8-9), "And the LORD said to Moses and to Aaron, Take to you handfuls of [soot] and so forth, and it shall become fine dust over all the land of Egypt." And behold, this is an argument from minor to major: if dust, whose nature it is not to travel, traveled a distance of forty days' [journey], how much more so for a voice, whose nature it is to travel, [it would carry] in the blink of an eye. The children of Israel journeyed from Ramses to Succoth, to fulfill what is said (Exodus 19:4), "And I bore you on eagles' wings."

"To Succoth" (Exodus 12:37). They were actual booths [sukkot], as it is said (Genesis 33:17), "And Jacob journeyed to Succoth"; these are the words of Rabbi Eliezer. And the Sages say: "Succoth" means nothing other than a place, as it is said (Exodus 13:20), "And they journeyed from Succoth and camped in Etham"; just as Etham is a place, so too Succoth is a place. Rabbi Akiva says: "Succoth" means nothing other than the clouds of glory, as it is said (Isaiah 4:5), "For over all the glory shall be a canopy." And I have this only for the past; for the time to come, from where? (Isaiah 4:6) "And a booth [sukkah] shall be for a shade by day," (and Isaiah 35:10) "And the ransomed of the LORD shall return" and so forth. Rabbi Nehemiah says: "Succotah" [with a final heh], because it requires a lamed at its beginning [meaning "to"], it was given a heh at its end. "About six hundred thousand on foot" (Exodus 12:37). About sixty myriads, these are the words of Rabbi Ishmael, as it is said (Song of Songs 3:7), "Behold, the bed of Solomon" "Behold the bed" of Him who spoke and the world came into being: sixty myriads of mighty ones from the mighty ones of Israel, "all of them girded with the sword" (Song of Songs 3:8), (Numbers 21:14) "therefore it is said in the book of the wars of the LORD," and it is written (Psalms 149:5-7), "Let the pious rejoice in glory, the high praises of God in their throat, to execute vengeance upon the nations, to bind their kings with chains." "Besides the little ones": besides the little ones and the women, the children and the small ones. Rabbi Yonatan says: a hundred and sixty myriads, besides the little ones, besides the women, children and elders. "And a mixed multitude also went up with them" (Exodus 12:38), a hundred and twenty myriads; these are the words of Rabbi Ishmael. Rabbi Akiva says: two hundred and forty myriads. Rabbi Yonatan says: three hundred and sixty myriads. "And flocks and herds, very much cattle" (Exodus 12:38). Concerning these the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Abraham our father (Genesis 15:14), "And afterward they shall come out with great substance": with their going out from Egypt I will fill them with silver and gold.

"And they baked the dough" (Exodus 12:39). This tells that they kneaded the dough but did not manage to leaven it before they were redeemed. And likewise you find for the time to come, what does it say (Hosea 7:4), "He shall cease from the city, from the kneading of the dough until it is leavened." "Cakes of unleavened bread": "cakes" means nothing other than a flat baked cake, as it is said (Ezekiel 4:12), "And you shall eat it as barley cakes," and it says (1 Kings 17:13), "Make me from it a small cake." A great miracle was performed for them with that cake, for they ate from it for thirty days until the manna came down for them. "Because they were driven out of Egypt" (Exodus 12:39). I might understand of their own accord; Scripture teaches, "And could not tarry," until they were redeemed. "Neither had they prepared for themselves any provision" (Exodus 12:39). This proclaims the praise of Israel, that they did not say to Moses, "How can we go out into the wilderness when we have no sustenance for the way?" Rather, they believed and went after Moses. Concerning them it is explained in the tradition (Jeremiah 2:2), "Go and proclaim in the ears of Jerusalem" and so forth. What reward did they take for this? (Jeremiah 2:3) "Israel is holy to the LORD" and so forth.

"Now the sojourning of the children of Israel" (Exodus 12:40). One verse says "four hundred and thirty years," and another verse says (Genesis 15:13), "And they shall serve them, and they shall afflict them four hundred years." How can these two verses be reconciled? Thirty years before Isaac was born, the decree was issued at the Covenant Between the Pieces. Rabbi says: one verse says, "And they shall serve them and afflict them four hundred years," and another verse says (Genesis 15:16), "And in the fourth generation they shall return here." How can these two verses be reconciled? If they repent, I am their Redeemer over generations; and if not, I am their Redeemer over the count of years. "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel" (this is written in [reference] 7). "And it came to pass at the end of [four hundred and] thirty years" and so forth (Exodus 12:41). This tells that once the appointed end arrived, the Omnipresent did not delay them for the blink of an eye. On the fifteenth of Nisan He spoke with Abraham at the Covenant Between the Pieces; on the fifteenth of Nisan Isaac was born, as it is said "and it came to pass at the end": one single end for them all. And so it says, "And it came to pass on that very day, all the hosts of the LORD went out" (Exodus 12:41). And likewise you find that whenever Israel is enslaved, the Divine Presence is, as it were, enslaved with them, as it is said, "And they saw the God of Israel, and under His feet" and so forth (Exodus 24:10); and when they were redeemed, what does it say? (Exodus 24:10) "And like the very heaven for clearness." And it says (Isaiah 63:9), "In all their affliction He was afflicted." I have this only for the affliction of the community; for the affliction of the individual, from where? Scripture teaches (Psalms 91:15), "He shall call upon Me and I will answer him" and so forth. And it says, "And Joseph's master took him" and what does it say (Genesis 39:21), "And the LORD was with Joseph and extended kindness to him." And likewise it says, "From before Your people whom You redeemed to Yourself from Egypt, nations and its gods" (2 Samuel 7:23). Rabbi Akiva says: were the matter not written, it would be impossible to say it. As it were, Israel said before the Omnipresent, "You redeemed Yourself." And likewise you find that in every place to which Israel was exiled, as it were, the Divine Presence was exiled with them. They were exiled to Egypt, the Divine Presence was with them, as it is said (1 Samuel 2:27), "Did I plainly reveal Myself to the house of your father" and so forth. They were exiled to Babylon, the Divine Presence was with them, as it is said (Isaiah 43:14), "For your sake I sent to Babylon." They were exiled to Elam, the Divine Presence was with them, as it is said, "And I will set My throne in Elam." They were exiled to Edom, the Divine Presence was with them, as it is said (Isaiah 63:1), "Who is this that comes from Edom." And when they return, the Divine Presence returns with them, as it is said (Deuteronomy 30:3), "And the LORD will return your captivity": it does not say "and the LORD will bring back," but "and the LORD your God will return." And it says (Song of Songs 4:8), "With Me from Lebanon, O bride." And does she come from Lebanon? Is she not going up to Lebanon? What then does Scripture teach by saying "With Me from Lebanon"? Rather, as it were, I and you go up together from Lebanon.

"It is a night of watching unto the LORD" (Exodus 12:42). On this night they were redeemed, and on this night they are destined to be redeemed; these are the words of Rabbi Yehoshua, as it is said, "this same night is a night unto the LORD." Rabbi Eliezer says: On this night they were redeemed, but in the time to come they will be redeemed only in Tishrei, as it is said, "Blow the horn at the new moon, at the full moon for our feast day" (Psalms 81:4); and why? "For it is a statute for Israel" (ibid.). And what does Scripture teach by "this same night is a night unto the LORD"? Rather, it is the night on which the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Abraham, "On this night I will redeem your children." And when the appointed time arrived, He did not delay them even for the blink of an eye. "A watching unto all the children of Israel throughout their generations." This teaches that all Israel must keep watch on this night.

Rabbi Eliezer says: In Nisan they were redeemed, and in Tishrei they are destined to be redeemed, as it is written, "Blow the horn at the new moon" (Psalms 81:4), and it is written, "And it shall come to pass on that day that a great horn shall be blown" (Isaiah 27:13). Rabbi Yehoshua says: In Nisan they were redeemed and in Nisan they are destined to be redeemed; what is the reason? "It is a night of watching unto the LORD," a night that has been guarded and ready since the six days of creation. And the other [understands]: a night guarded and protected from the harmful spirits. We learned there [in the Mishnah]: They must not give him fewer than four cups [of wine]. But how could the rabbis stand and institute a matter through which one might come to danger? For it has been taught: One should not eat in pairs nor drink in pairs. Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said: Scripture says, "It is a night of watching unto the LORD" [a night guarded and protected from the harmful spirits].

"And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the statute of the Passover" (Exodus 12:43-45). There is a passage that states a general rule at the beginning and a particular at the end, and a particular at the beginning and a general rule at the end. "And you shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6) is a general rule; "These are the words which you shall speak unto the children of Israel" (ibid.) is a particular. "This is the statute of the Torah" is a general rule; "that they bring you a red heifer" is a particular. "This is the statute of the Passover" is a general rule; "No foreigner shall eat of it" is a particular. [When a verse states] a particular and then a general rule and then a particular again, you include in the general rule only what is like the particular.

"This is the statute of the Passover." Scripture speaks of both the Passover of Egypt and the Passover of the generations; these are the words of Rabbi Yoshiyah. Rabbi Yonatan says: Scripture speaks of the Passover of Egypt. I know only of the Passover of Egypt; how do I know the Passover of the generations? Scripture teaches, "According to all its statutes and all its ordinances you shall keep it" (Numbers 9:3). Rabbi Yoshiyah said to him: This one and that one alike, Scripture speaks of both the Passover of Egypt and the Passover of the generations; and why does Scripture say "according to all its statutes and all its ordinances you shall keep it"? Rather, Scripture comes to teach concerning matters that are lacking in it. Isi ben Akavya says: The statute stated regarding the Passover applies only to its essence. "No foreigner shall eat of it" includes both an apostate Israelite and a gentile, as it is said, "Thus says the Lord GOD: No foreigner, uncircumcised in heart and uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter My sanctuary" (Ezekiel 44:9). "And every uncircumcised person shall not eat of it" (Exodus 12:48); "No foreigner shall eat of it." Apostasy disqualifies regarding the Passover, but apostasy does not disqualify regarding the heave-offering. And it is necessary [to state both]: for had the Merciful One written only "uncircumcised," I might say it is because he has no circumcision, but a foreigner who does have circumcision, say he may eat. And had Scripture taught us only "foreigner," I might say it is because his heart is not toward Heaven, but an uncircumcised man whose heart is toward Heaven, say he may eat; therefore both are necessary. "A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it" (Exodus 12:45); of "it" he does not eat, but he may eat of the unleavened bread and bitter herbs. "And when you have circumcised him, then he shall eat of it" (Exodus 12:44); "of it" the circumcision of his males and his servants is indispensable, but the circumcision of his males and servants is not indispensable for the heave-offering. "And you shall not break a bone in it" (Exodus 12:46); "in it" applies to a fit offering and not to a disqualified one.

"And every man's servant" (Exodus 12:44). I know only of a man's servant; how do I know the servant of a woman or a minor? Scripture teaches, "bought with money," from any source. Shmuel said: One who declares his servant ownerless has gone free and needs no writ of emancipation, as it is said, "and every man's servant bought with money," a man's servant and not a woman's servant; rather, a servant over whom his master has authority is called a servant, and one over whom his master has no authority is not called a servant. "And when you have circumcised him, then he shall eat of it" teaches that the circumcision of his servants prevents him from eating the Passover. I know only of the circumcision of his servants; how do I know the circumcision of his males? You may reason it out: "then" is said here and "then" is said further on; just as further on it concerns the circumcision of his males, so here it concerns the circumcision of his males, and just as here it concerns the circumcision of his servants, so further on it concerns the circumcision of his servants; these are the words of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yishmael says: The circumcision of his servants does not prevent him from eating the Passover. Then what does Scripture teach by "and when you have circumcised him, then he shall eat of it"? Rather, if a man had uncircumcised servants before him, how do we know that if he wished to circumcise them and feed them the Passover he is permitted? Scripture teaches, "and when you have circumcised him, then he shall eat of it." We find that he is permitted to keep uncircumcised servants, as it is said, "that the son of your handmaid may be refreshed" (Exodus 23:12). Rabbi Eliezer says: He is not permitted to keep uncircumcised servants, as it is said, "and when you have circumcised him." If so, what does Scripture teach by "that the son of your handmaid may be refreshed"? Rather, that his master acquired him on the eve of the Sabbath at dusk and did not manage to circumcise him before it grew dark; therefore it is said, "that the son of your handmaid and the stranger may be refreshed." Another interpretation: "and when you have circumcised him, then he shall eat of it." Why is it said? To include one in whom the commandment of circumcision was fulfilled even for a single hour, that even though the flesh grew back and covered the corona, it does not prevent him from eating, neither the Passover nor the heave-offering; and concerning this our teachers took a count at Lod and said it does not interpose with regard to ritual impurity.

"A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it" (Exodus 12:45). "Sojourner" is a resident alien; "hired servant" is the gentile. Rabbi Eliezer says: "A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it," why is it said? To derive from the Passover a ruling concerning the heave-offering, to disqualify the uncircumcised from it. Before one says, I have it by logic: if the lenient Passover disqualifies the uncircumcised, then the stringent heave-offering, is it not right that it should disqualify the uncircumcised? No; if you say so concerning the Passover, where Scripture limited the time of its eating for those who eat it, and therefore disqualified the uncircumcised from it, will you say the same of the heave-offering, where Scripture extended the time of its eating for those who eat it, [and] it is right that it should not disqualify the uncircumcised from it? Therefore Scripture teaches [the term] "sojourner and hired servant" regarding the Passover and "sojourner and hired servant" regarding the heave-offering, set free to be compared and to derive an analogy of equal phrasing: just as the "sojourner and hired servant" stated regarding the Passover disqualifies the uncircumcised, so too the "hired servant and sojourner" stated regarding the heave-offering disqualifies the uncircumcised. Rabbi Yitzchak says: "A sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it," why is it said? Has it not already been said, "No foreigner shall eat of it"? But if there were a circumcised Arab or a circumcised Gibeonite, I might hear that he is fit to eat the Passover; therefore Scripture teaches, "a sojourner and a hired servant shall not eat of it."

It has been taught: Rabbi Eliezer says: How do we know that an uncircumcised man does not eat of the heave-offering? "Sojourner and hired servant" is said regarding the Passover, and "sojourner and hired servant" is said regarding the heave-offering (Leviticus 22:10); just as the "sojourner and hired servant" stated regarding the Passover means the uncircumcised is forbidden it, so too the "sojourner and hired servant" stated regarding the heave-offering means the uncircumcised is forbidden it. Rabbi Akiva says: This is unnecessary; behold it says "any man whatsoever" (Leviticus 22:4) to include the uncircumcised. The master said: Rabbi Eliezer says, "sojourner and hired servant" is stated [and it is] set free [for analogy], for if it were not set free one could refute it: what of the Passover, which is more stringent in that one is liable concerning it for refused-offering, leftover, and impurity? In what way is it set free? If it is set free on the side of the heave-offering, [the terms] are needed there, for it has been taught: "Sojourner" is one acquired as a permanent acquisition; "hired servant" is one acquired as an acquisition of years. Let Scripture say "sojourner" and not say "hired servant," and I would say: one acquired permanently does not eat, and one acquired for years all the more so. Were it so, I would say a "sojourner" is one acquired for years, but one acquired permanently eats; the "hired servant" came and taught concerning the "sojourner" that even though acquired permanently he does not eat. Rather, the Passover term is set free. If you say, just as with the Passover an onen is forbidden, so too with the heave-offering an onen is forbidden, Scripture says "and every stranger" (Leviticus 22:10): I told you strangeness and not acute mourning. Say it also means not uncircumcision? Behold it is written "sojourner and hired servant." And what did you see [to include uncircumcision]? It is reasonable that uncircumcision should be included, for it lacks an act, and the act is in one's own body, and it is punishable by excision, and it was already in force before the giving of the Torah, and the circumcision of one's males and servants is indispensable for it.

"In one house shall it be eaten" (Exodus 12:46). Scripture speaks of one company, or does it mean "in one house" literally? When it says, "upon the houses in which they shall eat it," we learn that it is eaten in many houses. Then what does Scripture teach by "in one house shall it be eaten"? It speaks of one company. From here they said: The Passover is eaten in two places but it is not eaten by two companies. Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai says: In two places, how so? If they were inside the house and the beam split open above them, they go out to the courtyard; if they were in the courtyard and rain came down upon them, they enter the house, so that they are found eating it in two places. "You shall not carry any of the flesh out of the house abroad," outside the company; thus if he carried it out he transgressed the commandment. "And you shall not break a bone in it." Why is it said? It is said of a fit offering and not of a disqualified one. One who breaks a bone of a ritually pure Passover receives the forty lashes, but one who leaves over from a pure offering and one who breaks a bone of an impure one does not transgress. "And you shall not break a bone in it," whether a bone that has marrow in it or a bone that has no marrow in it. "All the congregation of Israel shall keep it" (Exodus 12:47). Why is it said? Because it says, "draw out and take you a lamb"; just as the Passover of Egypt was fit only for families, so the Passover of the generations should be fit only for a family; Scripture teaches, "all the congregation of Israel shall keep it," telling that the Passover is eaten in a mixed gathering. "And when a stranger sojourns with you and would keep the Passover" (Exodus 12:48): I might hear that as soon as he converts he keeps the Passover at once; Scripture teaches, "and he shall be as one born in the land," just as one native-born keeps it on the fourteenth, so the convert on the fourteenth. The school of Elijah taught: Once I was traveling from place to place, and a certain elder met me and said to me, Is there a portion for the nations of the world in the days of the Messiah? I said to him: My son, every nation and kingdom that oppressed Israel and pressed them hard will see Israel's good fortune and then return to their dust and never live again, as it is said, "the wicked shall see and be vexed"; but every nation and kingdom that did not oppress Israel nor press them hard will come in the days of the Messiah, as it is said, "and strangers shall stand and feed your flocks... but you shall be called the priests of the LORD" (Isaiah 61:5-6), and it says, "and to His servants He shall give another name" (Isaiah 65:15), these are the fit ones among the nations. "And every uncircumcised person shall not eat of it"; one might think he disqualifies the members of the company who come with him. Therefore Scripture teaches, "and every uncircumcised person," [meaning] when the whole of him is uncircumcised he is disqualified, but a part is not disqualified.

"One law shall there be for the native" (Exodus 12:49). Why is this said? Has it not already been said, "And he shall be as one born in the land" (Exodus 12:48)? What does Scripture come to teach by saying "One law shall there be for the native"? Because it says, "And when a stranger shall sojourn with you" (Exodus 12:48), I would know only the Passover offering, in which Scripture made the convert equal to the native. From where do I learn the rest of all the commandments of the Torah? Scripture teaches, saying "One law" [Torah] — the verse comes and makes the convert equal to the native with respect to all the commandments stated in the Torah.

"One law shall there be for the native and for the stranger" (Exodus 12:49). There are three kinds of converts. There is a convert who converted for the sake of a woman. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: You converted for the sake of forbidden meat — behold, it is given to you, as it is said, "You shall give it to the stranger who is within your gates" (Deuteronomy 14:21). The second convert converted in order to be supported as a poor man — behold, they give to him, as it is said, "And when you reap the harvest" (Leviticus 23:22). The third convert is the one who converted for the sake of the Name of the Holy One, blessed be He. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: He is weighed before Me as one of them [Israel], as it is said, "The assembly, one statute… one law shall there be for the native" (Numbers 15:15-16). And not only that, but he is weighed before Me as a Levite, as it is said, "And the Levite shall come, because he has no portion" (Deuteronomy 14:29). Moses said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the universe, is this convert like a Levite before You? He said to him: He is great before Me, for he converted for My sake. A parable: like a deer that grew up in the wilderness and came of its own accord and mingled with the flock, and the shepherd fed it and gave it drink and loved it more than his own flock. They said to him: This deer you love more than the flock? He said to them: How much labor have I labored over my flock, taking them out in the morning and bringing them in the evening until they were grown; but this one grew up in the wildernesses and the forests and came of its own accord into my flock — therefore I love it. So too the Holy One, blessed be He: How much have I labored over Israel — I brought them out of Egypt, I gave them light before them, I sent down the manna for them, I drove up the quail for them, I raised the well for them, I surrounded them with clouds of glory until they accepted My Torah; but this one came of his own accord, therefore he is weighed before Me as Israel and as a Levite.