These two approaches should come into play in the discussion the Tur has in siman 483 if one doesn't have wine and has to say the kiddush on matzah, when is karpas eaten. The Tur says in that case karpas should be eaten before kiddush for if it is eaten afterward, there will be nothing strange for the vegetable is bein eaten after the bread. However, according to the Maharal, the point is just to make the second eating of the vegetable as the maror a funny event and that can still take place even if the karpas is eaten after the matzah. The Maharal's approach in fact is the simple read of the Gemarah (114b) that since even if one can be yotzei maror with the karpas we eat again as a היכר for the kids. In other words, it is the second eating that is strange. See Chazon Eish who tries to align the other approach with the Gemarah.
The opinion of the Rambam (Matzah 8:2) and Rav Amram Gaon is that karpas should be dipped in charoses. Tosfos disagrees for we use charoses for maror only to remove the poison in the maror (115a,) which does not apply for the karpas. So why do the Rambam and Rav Amram hold one must use charoses?
The Bach (ibid) suggests that there is some degree of poison that exists in all vegetables.
The Ritva on the Haggadah says יש להם לאכול מן הירקות המרים, ונהגו לאכול כרפס, ויש לנו לטבלו בחרוסת, ... והטיבול הזה הוא זכר לוימררו את חייהם בעבודה קשה בחומר ובלבנים. According to the Ritva the karpas is a bitter vegetable to remember the slavery in Egypt. In light of this it may very well be that is why the Ritva says to dip it is charoses which is also meant to serve as a remembrance to the slavery (see Rishimos Shiurim of Rav Kamlenson siman 75.) It comes out the Ritva holds karpas is connected to being slaves in Egypt while the Bach in one approach holds we eat karpas as a means of demonstrating freedom so they view karpas from opposite sides.
The Rambam is of the opinion that everything eaten as a mitzvah through the seder, matzah, korech, maror, karpas, is dipped in charoses. Why does he hold that way? The Rambam (7:11) says הַחֲרֹסֶת מִצְוָה מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים זֵכֶר לַטִּיט שֶׁהָיוּ עוֹבְדִין בּוֹ בְּמִצְרַיִם. ... וּמְבִיאִין אוֹתָהּ עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן בְּלֵילֵי הַפֶּסַח. Here the Rambam says it is a mitzvah for the charoses to be present on the table durnig the Haggadah. As the Alter Rebbe puts it (473:20) וְתִקְּנוּ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה לְפָנָיו חֲרֹסֶת בִּשְׁעַת אֲמִירַת הַהַגָּדָה, שֶׁהַחֲרֹסֶת הוּא זֵכֶר לַטִּיט שֶׁנִּשְׁתַּעְבְּדוּ בּוֹ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ בְּמִצְרַיִםק וְזֵכֶר לַתַּפּוּחַ כְּמוֹ שֶׁ[יִּ]תְבָּאֵר, לְכָךְ צָרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת עַל הַשֻּׁלְחָן בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁמְּסַפֵּר שִׁעְבּוּד מִצְרַיִם. In other words, there is a halacha that the table should be adorned with charoses as a remembrance to the shibud and then there is another halacha of dipping in the charoses which the Rambam delineates in Chapter 8. In light of this it is understandable that the Rambam holds the halacha of dipping things in charoses is not a halacha in the item being sipped but it is a halacha in charoses as a way of enhancing the remembrance of the shibud that all dippings of the night should be done in charoses (ibid siman 79,80.)
According to to Tosfos (114a,) the Rosh and Tur that hold we don't dip in charoses why do they require a dipping at all? The Migdal Oz (8:8) says שאין אכילה חשובה בלא טיבול. In other words, to define it as a eating that will be acknowledged dipping is required.
The Ritva (presumable lishitaso that it is a bitter vegetable,) asks how can one say a ha'adamah on the vegetable if it is not fit for consumption and vegetables which are not edible are shehakol? He answers that כי בלילה הזה מצותו קובעתו ועושה אותו כאילו מידי דחזי, כיון שאנו חייבים לאוכלו, since we have to eat it, on this night it is deemed fit. In the Haggadah Naftali Sheva Ratzon (which is one of the commentaries on the Haggadah on Sefaria) says a derush idea, "This is an allusion to a Midrash: when the Israelite women gave birth in the fields and the Egyptian soldiers would come to kill the children, the ground would swallow up the infants. The Egyptians would then bring oxen to plow up the ground in order to find them. After they left, they broke through the ground and sprouted up like weeds, as it says “I caused thee to multiply as the plants of the field.” (Ezekiel 16:7) In order to remember this great miracle, we eat greens and recite the blessing boray peri ha’adamah even though it is not necessary to recite this blessing under these circumstances."
The Rambam (8:2) is of the opinion that one must eat a cazais of karpas. That would presumably be because every time we find an act of eating it entails eating a cazais. Many Rishonim disagree with the Rambam and do not require a cazais because one is not obligated to eat karpas for the sake of eating it but merely as a means of inspiring questions. This issue may have its roots as to the nature of the point of karpas. According to the approach that the karpas eating itself is to arouse questions then its whole purpose is defined as a question starter and it would not require a cazais. However, the Maharal notes according to his approach that the eating of karpas is to to encourage questions about the maror, it is logical that it will only make the eating of maror strange if an act of actual eating, meaning a cazais took place beforehand. In line of this thought, if the Rambam holds like the Maharal, it is possible to suggest another reason for why he requires the karpas to be dipped in charoses and that is to drive home the home the point that the marror is a second vegetable eating parallel to that of the karpas which will inspire questions (ibid siman 76.)
The Ritva says proof that there is no act of eating required but it is merely necessary to taste a little bit because we do not say a birchas hamitzvah before eating karpas. It is noteworthy that even though we say on the karpas the regular beracha of ha'adamah, the Tur (484) is of the opinion that even one who is not eating the karpas currently may say the beracha for others . The Taz explains that even though the karpas is not technically a mitzvah, once there is a takkanah to do it, its beracha is like a birchas hamitzvah where one can say it for others. In other words, it is not a mitzvah but it is a chiuv. The Ritva also must hold this way for he says it is not a mitzvah but as cited before he says מצותו קובעתו which must mean it is a Rabbinic obligation in order to inspire questions. The Baal Ha'Etur (cited in the Tur) that holds one can't say the beracha unless partaking in the karpas, in other words, it is a regular birchas hanehin would seem to view the karpas as not a geder of a takkanah but as a minhag. The Rambam that holds one must eat a cazais may hold due even though the point is to arouse questions (even if we don't say he holds like the Maharal,) once it is an obligation, it requires a cazais like any other act of eating.
>>>According to the approach that the karpas eating itself is to arouse questions then its whole purpose is defined as a question starter and it would not require a cazais.
ReplyDeleteUnless you distinguish between the taam hatakanah and the geder hatakanah. One does not necessarily determine the other.