The Prisoner's Hagaddah: Minimum and Maximum in Hagaddah

The Prisoner's Hagaddah: Minimum and Maximum in Hagaddah

See Shulchan Aruch Harav 473:53. He cites the Maharshal's "maase" (quoted in the Bach) of prisoner without access to a hagadda, but he had chumash and read on Leil Haseder the parshiyos on yetzias mitzrayim.

Just Masse. No instructional statement "if in that situation, do this workaround". My Har Nof uncle sees several possibilities. 1. Perhaps the standardized form of hagadda is so deeply rooted as The Way to do sippur, that the poskim can not say when you're in prison do it differently. They lacked the power to make such a statement (even if technically he may have been yotze with that). 2. The prisoner was in fact not yotze. Reading from the chumash without the droshos is not enough. But it was a nice thing to do like a person who only has half a kzayis matza, eating it without a brocho. 3. It is a psak. Calling something Maase is not diminuitive. The Maase of a man in the real word can be an even stronger form of psak than the instructions issued by the Rabbis in the beis medrish laboratory.

My reaction: 

Hagaddah Shleima and Sefer Hatodaah bring down opinions how old the Hagaddah is, some of the shitos seem farfetched. Some point out the Anshe Knesses Hagedolah made some of the text, and that does make sense. Re Rambam koseres, Rav Yoshe Ber said the text shelo bizman galus is different. One of the questions was on every night we eat meat cooked however, but tonight only roasted. Rambam holds there were 5 questions then; Gra holds we can only have 4 questions, so one of the current 4 was omitted.So there is not 1 correct text.

Rav Zevin brings a tshuvos hageonim that if you read the pesukim without the drashos Ghazal you are suspected of being a min. I think lashon harambam is vedoresh m'arami oveid avi. SO the drashos are part of the hagaddah, My feeling is that to only say torah shebiksav isn't a kiyum of hagaddah, there must be torah shebal peh also, and that's why we read the drashos and say things ourselves; that's why Rabi Akiva, Rabi Yehoshua, Rabi Elazar ben Azarya etc spoke, they were learnig Torah shebal peh (even some have girsa hilchos hapesach kol halayla - those halachos are from drashos).

So the prisoner did a good thing with what he had, but it wasn't complete.

If you think of the Hagaddah and don't verbalize it, are you yotzei? Can one do a pantomime Seder? No. Chinuch says so: Rambam 7:5 (Rabban Gamliel) You must say Pesach Matza and Maror; 7:3 if you are alone you have to ask the 4 questions to yourself. Thinking of the question isn't enough; you myst verbalize it. Why? One reason is Hagaddah is Torah Shebal Peh, so it must be verbalized. (Machlokes Gra/Beis Yosef on thinkning in learning, if it requires Birkas Hatorah.)

This TSBP isn't limited to being oral. Using props is mentioned: Rambam — for a she'eino yodeia lishol, point to maid and say we were slaves like her. Pantomime can be used to enhance the Hagaddah if someone will learn more from pantomime, but verbal sayings are also required. The mitzvah of Haggadah is V'higadta lebincha — not v'amarta lebincha. - Onkelos v'chavi (experience)? Otzar meforshei hagada - including maaseh (like Malbim v'higadti in Ki Savo - demonstrate). The Chinuch gives a different reason why we must verbalize the Hagaddah: Hearing those words will cause us to feel free and understand it, get it„ more. We thereby see that on Pesach night we must have a feeling of freedom. This is part of other mitzvos as well — like mourning or being happy on Yom Toy. Ray Ahron and Grid argued about it, though. Ray Ahron held the feeling was internal, and the actions are external manifestations fo the Inner feeling. The feelings gush out and cause the action. Grid hel the opposite; the actions are performed in order to cause a certain feeling in the heart. These two approaches are also offered with respect to Hagaddah. The Chinuch certainly holds like Grid, that the verbal Haggadah makes us feel free. However, I feel the Rambam holds that the feelings of freedom cause us to do certain actions. Rambam's Hagaddah in Avadim hayimnu says Maarich - because of your emotions you gush and are maarich. We must act free - drink 4 cups, recline. (See Griz if derech Cheirus - is it part of seder or separate.)

In the Gulag, Mendelevitz did lots of preparations for the seder — saving potatoes, making raisin wine, and saying as much of the Haggadah as he remembered. See http://www.5tjt.com/a-prisoners-seder/ Was he yotzei? As long as he verbalized it and mentioned Torah Shebal Peh. Yes. A prisoner in the punishment cell is able to — not everyone can, but some can — have the feeling of being free.

(And this answers why Moshe isn't in the Hagaddah — he isn't mentioned by name, but because it is TSBP everything includes Moshe because all TSBP came through Moshe.)

So the minimum is Pesukim, TSBP and feelings of freedom. The maximum is up to you. There is no maximum. (And see commentators why Rabbi Akiva and everyone spoke all night)

Tzitz- related: Mtznefes of Kohen Gadol

There is much discussion if Mitznefes of Kohen Gadol and Migba'as of Kohen hedyot were the same, similar or different.

See Tosfos Eruvin 95b, Tosfors Sukkah 5a, Rishonim on Yoma 12 and 25, and Tos Yeshanim Yoma 86.  (BTW this is the mekor to smething I posted on long ago, that there is place for 2 Tefillin on th ehead, if it's next to each other or one in front of each other; most of these sources hold in front of each other.)  (Ritva Yoma 25 cites Shimusha Rabbah there is no minimum shiur for tefillin but most hold it is 2 fingers).

Rashi, Ibn Ezra and Ramban all say Mibaas has more Pe'er.  My first reaction to that si that Tefillin are called Pe'er and that's why an avel doesn't wear them the first day (whether that is yom misa ukevirah only or also yom kevura is a different discussion).  Both kohen gadol and hedyot needed to wear tefillin (pe'er) with their head-covering, so perhaps because the Kohen Gadol had tzitz and tefillin in the tefilin area, but the kohen hedyot only had tefillin, part of the migbaas was on the tefillin-area (which was empty on the head) so the migbaas part on that area is called pe'er.

from Torahmusings
Ramman on Vayakhel-Pikudei 
Verses 27-29 tell us about the garments common to Aharon (and all later High Priests) and the ordinary priests. Verse 27 speaks of kutanot, tunics, for Aharon and his sons; Ramban thinks those were exactly the same.
The next verse mentions the mitznefet, Aharon’s head covering, and the migba’ot, the ordinary priests’ head covering. Ramban thinks they were made the same way, but worn differently—as he said in 28;31, a comment we did not see at the time. The High Priest would wrap the material around and around his head, to create a sort of hat, one that has an opening in the middle. Other priests would take that same material but wrap it in such a way that it fully covered the head.
Then, in our third verse of this section, Ramban points out that Chazal in Yoma 12a debated whether the avnet, the belt, of the High Priest differed significantly (he does not elaborate further, but Rashi to Yoma 12a tells us that the issue was whether a regular kohen wore a belt of linen or of mixed materials; the High Priest wore one of mixed materials throughout the year, and of linen on Yom Kippur).