Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Chipazon - Ours or Theirs?

שמות יב:יא - וככה תאכלו אתו, מתניכם חגרים, נעליכם ברגליכם, ומקלכם בידכם, ואכלתם אתו בחפזון, פסח הוא לה' י

Shemot 12:11 - Thus shall you eat it, your waists with belts, your shoes on your feet, your cains in your hands, and you shall eat it in haste, it is a Pesach for Hashem.

It seems from here that we had to be ready to leave Mitzraim in a hurry. But elsewhere we see that we actually didn't leave the night of the 15th of Nisan, but rather during the day.

במדבר לג:ג - ויסעו מרעמסס בחדש הראשון, בחמשה עשר יום לחדש הראשון, ממחרת הפסח יצאו בני ישראל ביד רמה לעיני כל מצרים

Bamidbar 33:3 - And they traveled from Raamses in the 1st month, on the 15th day of the 1st month, the day after the Passover, Bnei Yisrael went out of Mitzraim with a high hand, in front of the eyes of all Mitzraim.

So on the one hand we are told that Am Yisrael left in Chipazon. The other hand, we didn't leave until the next day, in a triumphant fashion.

So what is the Chipazon then?

At the end of Parshat Shemot, Moshe complains that only bad has happened to Am Yisrael since he started his mission. Hashem's response is as follows:

שמות ו:א - ויאמר ה', עתה תראה, אשר אעשה לפרעה, כי ביד חזקה ישלחם, וביד חזקה, יגרשם מארצו

Shemot 6:1 - And Hashem said: Now you will see what I will do to Par'oh, for with a strong hand he will send them, and with a strong hand he will expell them from his land.

So here we have the Hashem replying to Moshe that the appointed time has come, and the direct intervention from Heaven will cause Par'oh to expell Am Yisrael from Mitzraim. Ponder that verse for a moment.

There is an argument in the first chapter of the Talmud Bavli Brachot as to whether or not the Chipazon is Am Yisrael's or Mitzraim's. Rashi brings, on the word Chipazon in Devarim, that the Chipazon is Mitzraim's. On a certain level, we celebrate/commemorate the fact that they couldn't get rid of us fast enough. This is not a negative occurance, but rather a positive promise from Hashem that was fulfilled in the unfolding of the Exodus.

We are at the end of the Final Galus, and we are told that this Chipazon will not exist. Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

The pasuk in Yeshayahu makes it sound like a positive development, "for Hashem will go before us". This could make one think that the Chipazon in Yetziat Mitzraim was Am Yisrael's, despite the opinion brought by Rashi. Nonetheless, just like there are two ways to think about the Chipazon in Yetziat Mitzraim, so too I cannot help but think that there is more than 1 side to the pasuk in Yeshayahu.


  1. Another Sod to consider in Pesach times concerns the Bechorot. We learn that at the time of the Pidyon, 273 of them were redeemed for money, one more than 272. A hint that after 72 we will return to the system of before Chet HaEgel.

    What you suggested regarding the number 1335, that it equals 1290 + 65 + 70, may shed more light on this. The Pidyon of the 273 Bechorot took 1365 Shekel. If 1335 brings us to 70, 1365 brings us to 100.

    Pesach Sameach v'Kasher

  2. Sorry for the typo. It must be 1335 = 1200 + 65 + 70

  3. Very nice. I thought it was you that came up with the 1200 + 65 + 70 though... I don't feel like confirming that right now though :)
    Had you learned this before?

    Another possible thing that it could hint at is that after 272, we would again be in a situation after a Geulah akin to Mitzraim which would need the tashlum of Levi'im for Bechorim. Or maybe I say that because of my tribal and non-firstborn status. :)

    Chag Kasher v'Sameach

  4. It is obvious that 273 is related to 272 - the rest I realized only now. I think it follows that we may think of 5777 (67) as one of the denotations of 1335 (= 267*5 shekel).

    Don't worry :-) I am not suggesting that the Bechorot will get back their role in a literal sense. Only, the Hachlafa signifies a change of plan. We should realize that after Chet HaEgel things were never L'chatchila, and therefore the Tikun for Chet HaEgel will open almost unprecedented gates of Kedusha.

  5. Had you not said before that Chet HaEgel was metukan already?

  6. The Maharal writes in Netzach Yisrael that if in a Beit Midrash it is not so clear who came up with a Chidush, it is a sign of the presence of Eliyahu :-)

  7. If I said that Chet HaEgel was Metukan, it must have been a specific context. In the general sense, I do not think it is.

  8. I must have lumped together the idea of the bin chata'im with the lack of synchronization we discussed between spiritual and physical planes, and how you said that lack of synchronization was fixed.

  9. As for the denotations of 1290, the one corresponding to 5777 would be 5727 (1290/5), davka the year terminated a Shikuts - our lack of control over Eretz Yisrael and Yerushalayim. One of the interpretations of 1290 is that Moshiach arises to fight the Shikuts of the 1200 years of Galut. This bring to mind the other denotation of 1290, the year 5480 (1200+65+25), the year the GR"A was born.

  10. Moshiach against the Shikutz. Shikutz of the "physical" (3175 + 1290) is fought by Moshiach of "spiritual" (3338 + 1290), or pshat versus sod.