Some thoughts on Yachol mei-Rosh Chodesh

Now that we have moved on from the Four Sons, and particularly the שאינו יודע לשאול, we encounter the derasha of יכול מראש חדש:

This is yet more of the discussion about the obligation of sippur, rather than engaging in the actual sippur. Why the transition to this derasha now? Well, the prooftext is the same as the pasuk used to derive what to say to the last of the Four Sons, the שאינו יודע לשאול.

The derasha (based on Shemot 13:8} appears with fairly similar wording in the Mechilta:

והגדת לבנך. שומע אני מראש חדש ת"ל ביום ההוא אי ביום ההוא יכול מבעוד יום ת"ל בעבור זה בשעה שיש מצה ומרור מונחים לפניך על שולחנך:

Read the Mechilta inside, both before and after, and see how this is consistent with its general style. This shows how each part of the pasuk conveys important halachic meaning, and clarification of what I might have otherwise thought.

Why would we think particularly from Rosh Chodesh? It could be random, something related to the Moed but not actually on that day. It could be because that would be peros hapesach, 15 days before Pesach. As we learn in Yerushalmi  Shekalim 11b:

א"ר אבהו כל הן דתנינן פרס פלגא פלגא דל' יום קודם למועד שדורשים בהלכותיו

Thus, instead of being doresh the hilchos haPesach 30 days before, like we see elsewhere, we do this 15 days before. And so we might think that this instruction of והגדת applies at that set time as it does elsewhere.

I like this second answer, but for the sake of completeness, I will also mention that Rosh Chodesh does feature in close proximity to the pasuk of vehigadta levincha. Namely, in Shemot 13, there is repeated reference to the chodesh:

ד  הַיּוֹם, אַתֶּם יֹצְאִים, בְּחֹדֶשׁ, הָאָבִיב.	4 This day ye go forth in the month Abib.
ה  וְהָיָה כִי-יְבִיאֲךָ יְהוָה אֶל-אֶרֶץ הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי, אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ לָתֶת לָךְ, אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב, וּדְבָשׁ; וְעָבַדְתָּ אֶת-הָעֲבֹדָה הַזֹּאת, בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה.	5 And it shall be when the LORD shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Amorite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite, which He swore unto thy fathers to give thee, a land flowing with milk and honey, that thou shalt keep this service in this month.

Despite this, the actual day they went forth was mid-month.

Whatever the reason for thinking it would be 15 days before, we might have thought that. Therefore we learn that it is ביום ההוא. This is taken as the day of Pesach. And we might think it is ביום, during daylight. Therefore the pasuk specifies בעבור זה. Not just here, but elsewhere in midrash, the word zeh is taken to refer to something which is before you, which you can point to.

The context of the pasuk is either the service, or the matzos. The relevant pesukim:

ה  וְהָיָה כִי-יְבִיאֲךָ יְהוָה אֶל-אֶרֶץ הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי, אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ לָתֶת לָךְ, אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב, וּדְבָשׁ; וְעָבַדְתָּ אֶת-הָעֲבֹדָה הַזֹּאת, בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה.	5 And it shall be when the LORD shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanite, and the Hittite, and the Amorite, and the Hivite, and the Jebusite, which He swore unto thy fathers to give thee, a land flowing with milk and honey, that thou shalt keep this service in this month.
ו  שִׁבְעַת יָמִים, תֹּאכַל מַצֹּת; וּבַיּוֹם, הַשְּׁבִיעִי, חַג, לַיהוָה.	6 Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, and in the seventh day shall be a feast to the LORD.
ז  מַצּוֹת, יֵאָכֵל, אֵת, שִׁבְעַת הַיָּמִים; וְלֹא-יֵרָאֶה לְךָ חָמֵץ, וְלֹא-יֵרָאֶה לְךָ שְׂאֹר--בְּכָל-גְּבֻלֶךָ.	7 Unleavened bread shall be eaten throughout the seven days; and there shall no leavened bread be seen with thee, neither shall there be leaven seen with thee, in all thy borders.
ח  וְהִגַּדְתָּ לְבִנְךָ, בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא לֵאמֹר:  בַּעֲבוּר זֶה, עָשָׂה יְהוָה לִי, בְּצֵאתִי, מִמִּצְרָיִם.	8 And thou shalt tell thy son in that day, saying: It is because of that which the LORD did for me when I came forth out of Egypt.

What is the zeh? It could be the matzos, which would be a closer binding. Thus, one should eat unleavened bread, for seven days. And tell your son regarding those. Or else, more likely, it could be a distant binding, to  וְעָבַדְתָּ אֶת-הָעֲבֹדָה הַזֹּאת in pasuk 5. (There is the possible consideration that the yom is the seventh day, during which there is a chagiga. But we combine with what we know from pesukim in other places, to understand the meaning.) If so, it would seem that the zeh in pasuk 8 refers to the korban Pesach. Ibn Ezra understands the zeh to refer to the eating of the matzos:

[יג, ח]
בעבור זה -אמר רבי מרינוס: 

פירוש בעבור זה. היה ראוי להיותו הפך זה בעבור שעשה ה' לי. 

והביא רבים כמוהו לדעתו.

ולפי דעתי:
אין אחד מהם נכון. כי איך נהפוך דברי אלוהים חיים. וטעם הפסוק הפך מחשבתו. כי אין אנו אוכלים מצוות בעבור זה. רק פירוש בעבור זה, בעבור זאת העבודה שהוא אכילת המצה ולא יאכל חמץ, שהוא תחלת המצוות שצוה לנו השם. עשה לנו השם אותות עד שהוציאנו ממצרים.
והטעם לא הוציאנו ממצרים רק לעבדו ככתוב: בהוציאך את העם ממצרים תעבדון את האלהים על ההר הזה.
וכתוב: אשר הוצאתי אתכם מארץ מצרים להיות לכם לאלהים.


Rashbam understands zeh as referring to Hashem's actions, as the cause for the avodah:

בעבור זה - שעשה לי נסים במצרים. אני עובד עבודה הזאת.
וכן: זה היום אשר עשה ה' לי שהייתי לראש פינה.
נגילה ונשמחה בו. 

Thus, "because of that which Hashem did..." This, at odds with the derasha, but that is acceptable, because it is a derasha and does not need to be peshat. So too Ramban. 


Rashi gives the derasha in the Haggadah as the peshat:

Because of this: In order that I fulfill His commandments, such as these [commandments of] the Passover sacrifice, matzah, and bitter herbs. — [from Jonathan, Passover Haggadah]

בעבור זה: בעבור שאקיים מצותיו, כגון פסח מצה ומרור הללו:

Targum Yonatan just refers to the mitzvos, but does not specify just which ones; and in the Haggadah, the korban Pesach is not mentioned. Neither in the Mechilta is the korban Pesach mentioned.

It may well be that this omission in Mechilta is meaningful. It was written post-Churban, when the korban Pesach was not before him. Furthermore, perhaps we can fit this into my theory that the sippur, or better, the discussion of hilchos haPesach, was a sort of replacement for the missing korban Pesach. If so, we can understand the reference to peros haPesach, from Rosh Chodesh. Because that is when you would normally begin darshening the hilchos haPesach. But it is rather on that day. And not just on that day, but when the matza and maror, the only remnants, post-Churban, are standing before him. And so he has those two, and the sippur, or the hilchos haPesach, is the third of the trio.