English translation — ערב פסח

Erev Pesach<pg>36</pg>

A.

In the "Seder Korban Pesach" that the Alter Rebbe brought in his Siddur and wrote that one should say it on Erev Pesach after the Minchah prayer

(which is according to the nusach<sup>1</sup>

in the book Seder HaYom,

and was copied in the Shlah<sup>2</sup>

and in the Siddur of the Arizal<sup>3</sup>)

— concludes "And if<sup>4</sup>

the Pesach is found to be treifah, it does not avail him until he brings another"<sup>5</sup>.

And it requires clarification: In the above-mentioned "Order of the Paschal Lamb,"

not all the details of the order of its offering were brought,

and in particular things that are not usual and common every year⁶

— and why was this detail brought "If the paschal lamb is found to be a treifah, it does not count for him, etc."?

And even more so it will be difficult: This law

("If the paschal lamb is found to be a treifah, etc.")

applies immediately after slaughter

(and as the language of the Rambam⁷

"One who slaughters the paschal lamb and it is found to have a blemish or to be a treifah, behold he slaughters another, etc."),

and it is not so much a "part" that it was arranged here at the end of all the matters

— And in particular that ostensibly it is not an ending with something good —

After the entire order of its offering and after the details of the washing of the courtyard?

2.

And it can be explained in this, by prefacing the precise wording in the Siddur of the Alter Rebbe there before the "Order of the Paschal Sacrifice": "And let us render [as] bulls the utterance of our lips<sup>8</sup>

And the afternoon prayer is in place of the daily afternoon offering, and at the time when the Holy Temple existed, the paschal sacrifice was slaughtered after the daily afternoon offering.<sup>9</sup>

Thus it is fitting to engage in the Order of the Paschal Sacrifice after the afternoon prayer, and one should say this.

And behold, in the Shelah

(and thus it is copied in the Siddur of the AriZal)

the wording: "And let us render [as] bulls the utterance of our lips; therefore the Men of the Great Assembly instituted prayer corresponding to the daily offerings, and the afternoon prayer is corresponding to the daily afternoon offering.

And behold, at the time of the Holy Temple, the paschal sacrifice was slaughtered after the daily afternoon offering, and so that the bulls of our lips should be fulfilled, it is fitting to engage in the Order of the Paschal Sacrifice after the afternoon prayer."

But the Alter Rebbe omitted the words "therefore the Men of the Great Assembly instituted the prayer corresponding to the daily offerings..

And so that the bulls of our lips may be fulfilled"¹⁰.

And one could say,

that this is only for the sake of brevity,

but it is a change in content:<pg>37</pg>

In these words of the Shlah it is emphasized,

that the reason for reciting the order of the Paschal sacrifice is in the manner of the concept of "prayer corresponding to the daily offerings",

"so that the bulls of our lips may be fulfilled".

But superficially,

this that prayers were instituted in place of sacrifices,

and the recitation of the order of the sacrifice in place of its offering — these are two different laws: that prayers were instituted in place of sacrifices¹¹

were instituted

(which [was] in the enactment of the Men of the Great Assembly),

its meaning is,

that the Sages enacted the action

(the recitation)

of prayer in place of the offering of the daily sacrifice¹²

(and the reading of the passage of the daily sacrifice and the like before prayer,

is a custom that "all Israel

(with it)

were accustomed")¹⁴

; whereas the reading of the passage of the sacrifices in place of their offering is derived from what is stated¹⁵

"This is the law of the sin-offering",

"And this is the law of the guilt-offering" etc.,

as our Rabbis of blessed memory said at the end of Menachot¹⁶

Whoever engages in the law of the burnt-offering, it is as if he offered a burnt-offering¹⁷

Whoever engages in the law of the sin-offering, it is as if he offered a sin-offering; whoever engages in the law of the guilt-offering, it is as if he offered a guilt-offering.

And based on this, it can be said that this is the reason of the Alter Rebbe that he changed from the language of the Shelah

(and omitted the words "therefore they instituted etc. the prayer corresponding to the daily sacrifices..

and so that the words of our lips will compensate")

",

because this that was brought here the matter of "the afternoon prayer is in place of the daily sacrifice of the afternoon",

is not in order to equate the content of the afternoon prayer to the content of the recitation of the order of the Passover sacrifice

(that both of them are in place of a sacrifice¹⁸),

but only as a reason for the fixing of the time of the recitation of the order of the Passover sacrifice,

that since the Passover sacrifice was slaughtered after the daily sacrifice,

therefore "it is fitting to engage in the order of the Passover sacrifice after the afternoon prayer"

(which "is in place of the daily sacrifice of the afternoon").

But that according to this one must understand the reason of the Shelah,

that it is implied from his language

(as above)

that the recitation of the order of the Paschal sacrifice is the same concept as prayers in place of sacrifices they instituted them

("so that our lips will compensate for the bulls").

3.

And one can say the explanation of this:

Regarding "and we will repay [with] bulls [the utterance of] our lips,"

that the &lt;pg&gt;38&lt;/pg&gt;

speech is in place of the sacrifice,

we find several manners and categories&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;

:

a)

Reading the sections of the offerings of Shabbos and Rosh Chodesh atones in place of the offering — as our Rabbis of blessed memory said in Tractate Taanis&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

and Megillah&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;

"With what&lt;sup&gt;22&lt;/sup&gt;

shall I know that I will inherit it? Avraham said: Master of the Universe, perhaps Yisrael will sin before You, You will do to them etc. He said to him: No..

Take&lt;sup&gt;23&lt;/sup&gt;

for Me a three-year-old heifer..

He said before Him: Master of the Universe, it is well when the Beis HaMikdash exists; when the Beis HaMikdash does not exist, what will be with them? He said to him: I have already established for them the order of offerings; when they read them before Me, I consider it as if they offered them before Me, and I forgive them for all their sins."

b)

Engaging in Torah

(and particularly in the laws of offerings)

is like the offering of the offering — as our Rabbis of blessed memory said above

(at the end of Menachos)

"Torah scholars who engage in Torah&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;..

I consider it as if they burn incense and present to My name..

Whoever engages in the Torah of a sin-offering, it is as if he offered etc."

3)

This that prayers in place of sacrifices they instituted them.

And one must say that they are three different categories:

A)

That the reading of the order of the sacrifices in the Written Torah²⁵

is in place of the sacrifice — that is, regarding the result

(the "effect"),

that through reading the portion of the sacrifices in the Written Torah, the Holy One, blessed be He, atones for Israel just as He atones for them through sacrifices.

B)

That the occupation with Torah

(in the Oral Torah),

and especially in the laws^*25

of the service and sacrifices²⁶,

is considered like the offering and burning — that is

(not only regarding the result,

but)

also regarding the action of the offering and burning²⁷,

that it is as if there is here an act of offering.

But nevertheless,

this that the matter is as if there is here an act of sacrifice, namely only that it is considered as if the person

(the man)

performed an act of sacrifice and burning,

but this does not pertain to the object,

that there is here something of the object of a sacrifice²⁸.

3)

But this that prayers were instituted in place of sacrifices — it can be said that it pertains to the object of the sacrifice,

<pg>39</pg>

Not only that a person has the reward or atonement that comes through the offering of a sacrifice

(the result of the sacrifice),

or the elevation that is made in the person through the act of offering,

but rather the act of prayer is considered literally like the act of offering a sacrifice,

that there is here an object of "sacrifice,"

and therefore there are upon the one who prays several conditions similar to one who offers a sacrifice — "One must&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;

be careful that it be like the sacrifice in intention and that he not mix into it another thought like a thought that invalidates in holy things and that it be standing like the service and a fixed place like the sacrifices that each one has its fixed place for its slaughter and the placing of its blood that nothing interpose between him and the wall like the sacrifice that interposition invalidates..

And it is fitting that he have nice garments designated for prayer like the priestly garments etc.'".

4.

And behold, in the recitation of the "Order of the Paschal Sacrifice" on Passover Eve we find a novelty that we do not find its parallel in other matters of Torah regarding which it is said that "one who engages [in them] etc. is as if he offered [a sacrifice],"

that we do not recite the passage of the Paschal Sacrifice from the Written Torah&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

(in the manner of reciting the passage of the Daily Offering or the passage of the Sacrifices and the like

(as in the case of Ta'anit and Megillah)),

or engage in its laws from the Oral Torah

(in the manner of the Mishnah of "Eizehu Mekoman"&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;

(and as in the case of Menachot)

and the like)

— but rather we recount the actual order of its offering.

And one can say,

that this is because engaging in the order of the Paschal sacrifice is literally like the act of offering of the Paschal sacrifice,

in the manner that it is in prayer through the act of prayer.

And with this is resolved the language in the book Seder HaYom after the text of "Seder Korban Pesach"

(and it was copied in the ShLaH,

Siddur HaAriZaL and Siddur of the Alter Rebbe)

: this is³²

the matter in a great abbreviation.

And a person who fears and trembles at the word of HaShem needs to read it in its time so that his reading will stand in place of its offering, and he should worry about the destruction of the Temple and plead before HaShem, Creator of the world, that He rebuild it speedily in our days, Amen.

That the precise language "the one who fears and trembles at the word of the L-rd

(must)

read it at its time so that his reading counts in place of its offering" implies,

that this that they say the order of the Paschal sacrifice after the afternoon prayer is not only because this is the time of the offering of the Paschal sacrifice

(as per the meaning of the language before the order of the Paschal sacrifice),

but because when the reading is at its time — "his reading counts in place of its offering."

And seemingly it requires explanation: behold, one of the differences between the two laws of prayers they instituted in place of offerings and reading the portion of

(and study of the laws of)

the offerings in place of their offering is,

that prayer must be specifically at the time of the offering of the daily offerings&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;,

but not so the study of the portion of

(and the laws of)

the offering in place of its offering is not connected with the time of the obligation of the offering&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;.

[as is clear from the continuation of the sugya at the end of Menachot regarding the matter of "whoever engages in Torah etc. it is as if he offered etc.",

and as it is stated before this there explicitly on the verse³⁵

A song of ascents: Behold, bless the Lord, all servants of the Lord, who stand in the house of the Lord at night —<pg>40</pg>

What is [meant by] "at night"? Rabbi Yochanan said: These are Torah scholars who engage in Torah at night; Scripture credits them as if they are engaged in [the Temple] service.

And what the Tur wrote&lt;sup&gt;36&lt;/sup&gt;

that the section of the offerings "it is better to say it during the day when they are in place of the offering of a sacrifice whose time is during the day"

(and according to several opinions&lt;sup&gt;37&lt;/sup&gt;

one must say it standing),

behold

(a)

already wrote the Tzemach Tzedek&lt;sup&gt;38&lt;/sup&gt;

that "this is specifically regarding the matter of saying these sections that are related to the order of prayer&lt;sup&gt;*38&lt;/sup&gt;,

but regarding the matter of studying the laws of offerings there is no distinction&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;

between day and night"&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;,

(b)

also in this it is not comparable&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;

to the severity of the obligation of prayer in its time

(which must be precisely at the time of the offering of the daily offerings specifically&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;)].

And if so, it is perplexing what he wrote that "a person who is fearful and trembling at the word of G-d must read it in its time so that his reading will count in place of its offering" — is this that "his reading will count in place of its offering" dependent on the reading being in its time?

And it is proven from this,

that the recitation of the "Order of the Paschal Offering" is considered like the actual act of offering the Paschal Offering itself,

and therefore "a person who fears and trembles at the word of G-d needs to read it at its time so that his reading should stand in place of its offering".

And this is also the precise wording of the Shelah in his words before the Order of the Paschal Offering,

that he brings that prayers are in place of offerings because of "and we will render [the] bulls of our lips",

and he continues "and in order that the bulls of our lips should be rendered, it is proper to engage in the Order of the Paschal Offering after the afternoon prayer" — in this it is emphasized that

(a)

the content of the recitation of the Order of the Paschal Offering is like the matter of prayer,

(b)

the "and we will render [the] bulls of our lips" through the recitation of the Order of the Paschal Offering depends on this, that we say it at its time,

"after the afternoon prayer".

5.

However, based on this, one must examine the wording of the Alter Rebbe in his Siddur,

that he changed from the wording of the above-mentioned Shelah

(as above, section 2),

even though he copied the wording

(after the text of the Order of the Paschal Offering)

"A person who fears and trembles at the word of G-d must read it at its time so that his reading stands in place of its offering."

Simply, one can say that this is for brevity,

and especially since in the book Seder HaYom it is not present&lt;sup&gt;42&lt;/sup&gt;

the lengthy version found in the Shelah.

And seemingly, one must explain this in greater depth,

for the intention of the Alter Rebbe in this is,

that there is an advantage in the recitation of "the Order of the Paschal Offering" also regarding the matter that prayers were instituted in place of offerings.

For behold, in prayer there is no apparent revelation of its connection to the act of offering a sacrifice,

rather, our Sages explained and revealed that the act

(speech)

of prayer⁴³

is considered as the act of offering a sacrifice,

that is, that in a revealed manner⁴⁴

the person is not engaged in a matter of the sa-<pg>41</pg>

Multitude of sacrifice

(that this is not even like that of one who is engaged in the study of the sin-offering etc.,

that the person is engaged openly in the study of sacrifices)

;

But not so in our case,

the recitation of the order of the Paschal sacrifice,

behold we recite the details of the order of the offering of the sacrifice as it was done in actuality in the Holy Temple

(that this is even more than the study of the laws of the sacrifice in the Oral Torah as above),

and that is that the person is occupied in actuality with the matter of the offering of a sacrifice,

except that it is not in deed but in his speech; and from this it is understood,

that when this speech is considered as the deed of offering,

this is even more than the deed of prayer.

And that is that it is considered as if he stands in the Holy Temple and does in actuality all the details of the things that he recites in the order of the Paschal sacrifice,

the deed of offering literally⁴⁵.

And therefore the Alter Rebbe did not copy the wording of the above-mentioned Shelah,

which implies that the “and we will fulfill [the vow of] our lips” that through the recitation of the order of the Passover sacrifice is like the matter of prayers which they instituted in place of sacrifices,

because in the recitation of the order of the Passover sacrifice it is in a more elevated manner.

6.

Based on the above, it can also be explained why here there is a special obligation that “he should be distressed over the destruction of the Temple and plead before Hashem, Creator of the world, that He rebuild it speedily in our days, Amen”,

for since the perfection of the act of the Passover sacrifice is in its offering in the Holy Temple,

therefore, in order that his reading should rise in place of the actual offering,

he needs to know that in the elevation that his reading rises in place of the actual offering, “and we will fulfill [the vow of] our lips”,

there is still lacking in the perfection of its offering,

and he must be distressed over the destruction of the Temple and plead etc. that He rebuild it,

so that then there will be the perfection of the offering of the Passover sacrifice,

and with the combination of the distress and the pleas

(“and plead”)

this causes⁴⁶

that his reading will be in place of the actual offering⁴⁷.

And according to this foundation it is well understood the conclusion "And if the Paschal lamb is found to be treifah, he has not fulfilled [his obligation] until he brings another",

for in the conclusion of the "Order of the Paschal Lamb" they emphasize the intention in all this recitation

(as the saying "everything follows the conclusion"⁴⁸),

and therefore they say this law of "if the Paschal lamb is found to be treifah, he has not fulfilled [his obligation] etc.",

that in this it is emphasized that the action of the person is not sufficient,

but rather it must be and is primary,

the object of the sacrifice in actuality,

therefore if the sacrifice is invalidated he has not fulfilled [his obligation] and he must bring another

(corresponding to the above novelty,

that the engagement in the Order of the Paschal Lamb must be in a manner that it affects him that his offering be actual,

not only the result of the offering or the virtue in the action of the person that it is considered like an offering).

7.

And one must explain the reason that the Paschal lamb is different from other sacrifices regarding the matter of "and we will render [the] bulls [of] our lips",

that specifically regarding it they recite the Order of the Paschal Lamb in a manner that it is in place of the actual act of offering:

K"P is the sacrifice of the redemption of the people of Israel,

both redemption simply,

as it is said regarding Passover&lt;pg&gt;42&lt;/pg&gt;

Egypt "And you shall say&lt;sup&gt;49&lt;/sup&gt;

It is the Passover sacrifice to the Lord, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt when He smote the Egyptians and saved our houses",

and they are redemption and inner freedom,

namely the birth of the people of Israel&lt;sup&gt;50&lt;/sup&gt;

in the Exodus from Egypt,

that Bnei Yisrael went out from a state of "servants of Pharaoh" to be "servants of the Lord"&lt;sup&gt;51&lt;/sup&gt;,

which comes and is drawn forth by means of the Passover sacrifice&lt;sup&gt;52&lt;/sup&gt;.

And from this come the two matters:

a)

That the content of the engagement in the Paschal sacrifice in this time is,

that a person elevates himself to a state of redemption and freedom

(the content of the concept of the Paschal sacrifice),

and therefore in the reading of the order of the Paschal sacrifice there is all the completeness possible in the time of exile in the matter of offering a sacrifice — not only the result,

or even the elevation of the person,

but he has a semblance of the act of offering,

and not only like in the matter of prayer,

but even more

(as above),

that it is as if he is standing in the Holy Temple and doing all the details of the things in the order of the Paschal sacrifice that he reads⁵³.

b)

On the other hand: This itself brings him to feel the greatness of the lack in that the Holy Temple does not stand and there is no redemption in actuality,

And despite all the elevations that there are in reading the order of the Paschal sacrifice

(which is truly as if he stands in the Holy Temple and fulfills the entire order of the Paschal sacrifice),

yet regarding the elevation of offering a sacrifice in physicality and in actual deed — it is not.

And therefore, following the reading of the order of the Paschal sacrifice "in its time that its reading stands in place of its offering" — "he should worry about the destruction of the Temple and plead before Hashem, Creator of the world, that He build it speedily in our days —

(and concludes)

Amen".

8.

And it may be said that the content of the matter of the aforementioned "worry" about the destruction of the Temple

(which comes as a result of the feeling of the elevation in offering a sacrifice in actual deed in the Holy Temple simply in physicality)

— is also hinted in the aforementioned halacha that at the conclusion of the order of the Paschal sacrifice "and if the Paschal sacrifice is found to be a treifah, it does not avail him until he brings another".

Now, at first glance, it requires explanation: why did it specify specifically the law of "found to be a treifah",

and not "found to have a blemish",

that both were brought together in the Rambam

(and he prefaced "blemish" to "treifah"),

as above section 1?

And based on the above, one can say

(in the manner of a hint),

that the term "treifah" hints at exile⁵⁴,

as our Sages, of blessed memory, said on the verse⁵⁵

"And flesh in the field, a treifah",

since flesh went outside its boundary, it becomes like a treifah⁵⁶,

that the hint in this is,

that when the children of Israel<pg>43</pg>

They are outside their partition — in exile,

even when their service is at the peak of excellence and perfection,

behold, this that they are outside their partition,

in exile — this that they are "in the field" — they are like a "tereifah",

that they have no perfection&lt;sup&gt;57&lt;/sup&gt;

true,

the vitality&lt;sup&gt;58&lt;/sup&gt;

and the freedom.

And this is the hint in this law,

that at the time of reciting the order of the Paschal sacrifice a person must feel,

that although he elevates himself to a state of redemption and spiritual freedom — and even that he merits an ascent in the manner of "Pesach",

a term of skipping and jumping&lt;sup&gt;59&lt;/sup&gt;,

that is, an ascent beyond all measure&lt;sup&gt;60&lt;/sup&gt;

— nevertheless, since the "Pesach" is "in the field" it is in the category of "tereifah",

since he is still in exile,

And consequently — "it did not count for him",

that in all the levels that exist in this reading of his,

behold, in comparison to the level of Israel at the time of the redemption,

they come to recognition that "it did not count for him",

that in his level this is not an ascent for him,

it is not at all comparable to his true ascent at the time of the redemption.

And it can be said that this is what they conclude "until he brings another" — "another" for superiority,

as in the Haggadah — "another" that is above even the seraph

(the world of Briyah&lt;sup&gt;61&lt;/sup&gt;),

a completely different service

(Atzilut&lt;sup&gt;62&lt;/sup&gt;),

which is not at all comparable to the previous service,

and it is the ascent that will be in the offering of the Paschal sacrifice in the Third Temple,

"may it be built..

speedily in our days, Amen".

(From the talk of Erev Pesach,

after the Minchah prayer,

5748)