Bread Line

וְאָכְלוּ אֶת־הַבָּשָׂר בַּלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה צְלִי־אֵש ׁ וּמַצּוֹת עַל־מְרֹרִים יֹאכְלֻהוּ

וּמַצּוֹת, בִּשְׁבִיל שָׂרָה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת עֻגוֹת וְלֹא טָעֲמוּ לֶחֶם

Parshas Bo speaks about the culmination of the Makos and

Shibud Mitzrayim , and of course includes the very first Mitzvos in the Torah, which are found in the Pessukim introduced with the words הַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה לָכֶם. After mentioning the Mitzvah of Kiddush Hachodesh , HKBH tells Moshe and Aharon about the Korban Pesach, which was to be brought on the 14th of Adar and eaten that night just prior to Makkas Bechoros .

In speaking about the Mitzvah to eat the Korban Pesach, the Torah includes the actual Korban, וְאָכְלוּ אֶת־הַבָּשָׂר בַּלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה צְלִי־אֵש ׁ, as well as two other aspects: וּמַצּוֹת עַל־מְרֹרִים יֹאכְלֻהוּ. The Korban itself was to be accompanied by Matzos and Marror , two items that are quite familiar to us, but were first introduced to Moshe and Aharon at that moment.

The Medrash, here, speaks about the way the Korban was to be eaten, including reasons for each aspect of the Mitzvah. First, the Medrash explains why the Korban Pesach must be roasted on an open fire: בִּשְׁבִיל אַבְרָהָם שֶׁהִצַּלְתִּיו מִכִּבְשַׁן הָאֵשׁ. Then we learn the reason for the Matzos: מַצּוֹת, בִּשְׁבִיל שָׂרָה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת עֻגוֹת וְלֹא טָעֲמוּ לֶחֶם. Finally, the Medrash explains why the Korban is eaten with Marror : מְרֹרִים, בִּשְׁבִיל יַעֲקֹב, שֶׁכְּשֵׁם שֶׁנִּרְדְּפוּ בָּנָיו בְּמִצְרַיִם כָּךְ רְדָפוֹ עֵשָׂו.

Each part of the Korban Pesach seems connected to one of our forebearers: the Korban itself to Avrohom Avinu, the Matzos to Sarah Immenu and the Marror to Yaakov, and each of these connections certainly holds much meaning. It seems, however, that one is unlike the rest.

We can understand that the Korban Pesach, the very symbol of Cheirus , of the elimination of suffering, would be tied to the Mesiras Nefesh of Avrohom in Ur Kasdim or the travails experienced by Yaakov at the hands of Esav. As we eat the Korban Pesach, we can well reflect on the fact that our Avos suffered on our behalf, leading us to the Cheirus we were to soon enjoy. What then of the Matzah? Why must we commemorate the fact that Sarah Immenu served Matzah to the Malachim while eating the Korban Pesach? What is the connection between the two?

Thew truth is, it is easy to draw a straight line between the visit of the Malachim to Avrohom Avinu and Leil Pesach. The Tanchuma in this week’s Parsha tells us: בַּחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן נִגְזְרָה גְּזֵרָה וְנִדְבַּר עִם אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ בֵּין הַבְּתָרִים. בַּחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן בָּאוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לְבַשְּׂרוֹ עַל יִצְחָק. Both the בְּרִית בֵּין הַבְּתָרִים and the visit of the Malachim both occurred on the fifteen of Nissan, and of course we know בַּחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן נוֹלַד יִצְחָק בַּחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן נִגְאֲלוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם.

Seeing as the visit of the Malachim , during which שָׂרָה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת עֻגוֹת, took place on the same date as Yetzias Mitzrayim , it would perhaps stand to reason that there was a connection between the Mitzvos done on that night and the story of the Malachim , leading to the statement of the Medrash. There, does, however seem to be more at play, based on the wording of the Drasha .

The Medrash tell us שָׂרָה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת עֻגוֹת וְלֹא טָעֲמוּ לֶחֶם, but the last three words seem to be extra. Clearly we know that if Sarah provided the Malachim with Matzah, they didn’t taste bread. Why does the Medrash have to point this out? It seesm as though there is some sort of virtue to the fact that Sarah baked Matzos specifically, preventing the Malachim from eating Lechem . How can we understand this? Why was it important that the Malachim did not eat Lechem , and what does this have to do with the fact that we eat Matzah on Leil Pesach?

These questions become even more pressing if we take into account another Maamar Chazal.

The Gemara in Bava Metziah points out a difficutly in the Pessukim at the beginning of Parshas Vayera . On one hand, Avrohom instructed Sarah to make bread, לוּשִׁי וַעֲשִׂי עֻגוֹת, as we have seen. Later, however, when the Torah describes the repast offered to the Malachim , we find וַיִּקַּח חֶמְאָה וְחָלָב וּבֶן הַבָּקָר. It seems, as the Gemara points out, לֶחֶם לָא אַיְיתִי לְקַמַּיְיהו ּ, they were not served bread.

The Gemara answers: אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ אוֹכֵל חוּלִּין בְּטׇהֳרָה הָיָה, וְשָׂרָה אִמֵּנוּ אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם פֵּירְסָה נִדָּה . Sarah Immenu had become Tamei while kneading the dough, and since אַבְרָהָ, Avrohom Avinu was Makpid to eat even Chulin only in a state of Taharah, he did not serve it to the Malachim .

Based on the Gemara , it emerges that the עֻגוֹת that Sarah Immenu prepared were never even served to the Malachim . This makes the Medrash even more difficult to understand: why do we eat Matzos on Pesach because Sarah baked them for the Malachim , who never ate them? How are we to understand the words וּמַצּוֹת, בִּשְׁבִיל שָׂרָה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת עֻגוֹת וְלֹא טָעֲמוּ לֶחֶם in light of this Gemarah ?

As we have seen, the Medrash seem to place emphasis on the fact that the Matzos prepared by Sarah Immenu would have prevented the Malachim from eating Lechem , וְלֹא טָעֲמוּ לֶחֶם. If so, it would seem important to understand the nature of Lechem , and why Sarah wished to ensure that the Malachim would not taste it.

Although there are many Mamarei Chazal that discuss Lechem , there are not many that reveal a negative aspect of this most basic staple. There is, however, a Gemara in Brachos that seems to reveal a limitation of bread.

The Passuk in Tehillim says: וְיַיִן  יְשַׂמַּח לְבַב־אֱנוֹש ׁ...וְלֶחֶם לְבַב־אֱנוֹש ׁ יִסְעָד, teaching that wine causes joy and Lechem satisfies a person, and the Gemarah in Brachos notes that bread and wine are quite different. Whereas wine is both סָעֵיד וּמְשַׂמַּח, the same is not true of bread: נַהֲמָא מִסְעָד סָעֵיד, שַׂמּוֹחֵי לָא מְשַׂמַּח. Bread only satisfies a person, but does not cuase Simcha, as opposed to wine, which has both qualities.

How can we understand this Gemara ? What does it mean that Lechem is סָעֵיד but not מְשַׂמַּח? The Gemara could of course mean in a physical sense—wine both satiates a person and causes him joy, while bread only fills us up but does not elate—but we would not need the Gemara or the Passuk to tell us there. There seems to be a deeper message—what might that be?

There is another time that the term Lechem appears in the Torah, in an even more surprising context. The Passuk in Parshas Pinchas, speaking about the Korban Tamid, tells us: אֶת־קׇרְבָּנִי לַחְמִי לְאִשַּׁי רֵיחַ נִיחֹחִי תִּשְׁמְרוּ לְהַקְרִיב לִי בְּמוֹעֲדוֹ. The Korban itself is reffered to as the Lechem of HKBH—an indication that there is a deeper significance to the term.

R’ Meir Simcha, in Meshech Chacham , explains that the Passuk can be understood based on the true role of Lechem , as he explains in one short line: הִנֵּה הַלֶּחֶם סוֹעֵד לֵבָב הָאָדָם וּמְקַשֵּׁר הַנֶּפֶשׁ לְהַגוּף . The purpose of LEchem is to connect the Guf to the Nefesh. The words אֶת ־קׇרְבָּנִי לַחְמִי לְאִשַּׁי are now understood becase like Lechem , the ultimate purpose of all Korbanos is to connect Bnei Yisroel with HKBH. Just as Lechem connects the Nefesh to the Guf , so to Korbanos connect the Ruchani to the Gashmi.

We can explain the Gemara in Brachos bases on this idea. As we know, everything in this world can be place in one of two categories: Kodesh and Chol, Ruchani and Gashmi. The In order for us to live on this earth, to lead the lives that we are meant to, we must have Lechem : we must be able to fuse the Nefesh and the Guf . This reality is expressed by the words of the Gemara : נַהֲמָא מִסְעָד סָעֵיד. Lechem satisfies our worldly needs, allowing us to have exist in two worlds, as it were.

The truth is, however, that this is not the ultimate existence: in a perfect world we would be able to elevate our Gashmi to the point that it too is in the realm of Ruchani —our existence of Lechem is an essential compromise. This is why the Gemara tells us שַׂמּוֹחֵי לָא מְשַׂמַּח—while we are satiated by Lechem , we are not elated by it because it indicates that we have not reached the pinnacle of our existence—that we have potential unmet potential. True Simcha comes from an unencumbered relationship with HBKH, Yeshayahu HaNavi tells us: שׂוֹשׂ אָשִׂישׂ בַּה' תָּגֵל נַפְשִׁי בֵּאלֹקַי .

Perhaps this was the intention of Sarah Immenu when her visitors arrived. As we know, it was not clear to Avrohom Avinu who these three men were—he asked them to wash their feet for fear of a hint of Avodah Zarah. The purpose of the Hachnasas Orchim of Avrohom and Sarah, however, was to affect those who stayed with them, to elevate them and bring them close to HKBH. It was for this reason that Sarah chose to make Matzos—so that she could offer her guests an existence beyond Lechem . Why introduce the compromise of מִסְעָד סָעֵיד, שַׂמּוֹחֵי לָא מְשַׂמַּח if they could reach beyond?

This is the message of the Medrash: וּמַצּוֹת, בִּשְׁבִיל שָׂרָה שֶׁעָשְׂתָה לְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת עֻגוֹת וְלֹא טָעֲמוּ לֶחֶם. Whether they ate the עֻגוֹת or not, the Malachim did not taste even a hint of Lechem in the home of Sarah Immenu —they were fed the prospect of a life free of Gashmi, one in which the compromise of Lechem is not necessary.

This is the message of Matzos eaten with the Korban Pesach. As Klal Yisroel stood ready to depart the Kur Habarzel , freed from the shackels of Shibud for the first time in generations, they were given a message about Cheirus : וְאָכְלוּ אֶת־הַבָּשָׂר בַּלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה צְלִי־אֵש ׁ וּמַצּוֹת עַל־מְרֹרִים יֹאכְלֻהוּ. The Korban Pesach was eaten with Matzah, reminiscent of the עֻגוֹת prepared by Sarah Immenu so many years before. The Matzos teach us that true Cheirus is a life unencumbered by Gashmi, free of the compromise of that Lechem offers: מִסְעָד סָעֵיד, שַׂמּוֹחֵי לָא מְשַׂמַּח.

If we subsume the lesson of the Matzah, and strive for a life in which even our Gashmi is made holy, we too can enjoy not only Cherius but the true Simcha promised by the Passuk : שׂוֹשׂ אָשִׂישׂ בַּה' תָּגֵל נַפְשִׁי בֵּאלֹקַי.