[Avodah] Drops of wine

Akiva Miller kennethgmiller at juno.com
Wed Jun 27 08:36:51 PDT 2012


R' Daniel Israel asked:

> What I would be more curious of, assuming you (RAM) having been
> looking through an (extensive?) Hagada collection is the answer
> to the original question: how many hagaddos (and which ones)
> mention spilling for the plagues because of decreased joy?

Great question. I'm pretty sure my collection is on the small side, but here's what I've found:

Ritva, Rashbam, Kol Bo, Gevuros Hashem, Rashi, Ol'los Ephraim, and Chasam Sofer, as printed in the all-Hebrew Haggadah Kol Dodi -- I see nothing relevant to this question.

ArtScroll's Haggadah (pg 127) quotes the pasuk "Binfol oyivcha" (Mishle 24:17) and attributes the connection to Abarbanel. I did not see it in the Abarbanel as printed in Kol Dodi, but could easily have missed it. On the other hand, I'm not the only one who can't find it. Back in 2006, in Avodah Digest 17:23, R' Josh Backon wrote that "the alleged Abarbanel which quotes the "sorrow" hypothesis doesn't exist." (See there for more interesting comments.)

The Haggadah "From Twilight to Dawn", by Rabbi Shlomo Kahn, writes something interesting on pg 63: "Why do we spill a drop of wine for each of the ten plagues? Judaism teaches not to rejoice at the downfall of a personal foe, but only at the destruction of enemies of God and Israel. (See Proverbs 11:10) Yet human suffering, even of an enemy, dilutes our joy. Therefore we reduce our cup's content when we recall the plagues." And the following paragraph cites Megilla 10b about Hashem telling the angels NOT to sing at the Yam Suf.

At my first cursory glance at the above, I made the mistake of presuming that Proverbs 11:10 was our pasuk, Binfol Oyivcha. But it is not. Looking at 11:10 more carefully, it is exactly as From Twilight To Dawn cites it -- it supports the idea that we SHOULD "sing when the wicked are destroyed". My conclusion is that although this author does distinguish between different kinds of enemies, he does not cite any sources for that distinction. (Note: In Avodah 17:24, R"n Lisa Liel quoted R' David Bar Hayim with an extensive comparison of Mishlei 11:10 and 24:17.)

"The Lehmann Hagadah" (Feldheim 1977), "with the commentary of Rabbi Dr. Marcus Lehmann of Mainz," does not even mention any removal of wine from the cup. Is it possible that the German communities do not have this practice?

According to the English "Me'am Loez - The Torah Anthology - Passover Haggadah - Sephardic", pg 59, these drops are NOT removed from the second of the Four Cups, but from a separate cup of vinegar which was poured for this purpose.

In Avodah 17:25, R"n Toby Katz cited her father, Rav Nachman Bulman, as using the "Binfol" argument. I consider him to be worthy of mentioning here.

And in Avodah 17:28, Rav Elazar Teitz quoted
> Rav Yechezkel Abramsky, who expresses that very thought: since
> the kosos express our joy, which is not fully complete because
> of "ma'asei yadai," we spill some.

I have a few questions that I'd like to raise at this point. What is the point of removing these drops of wine? I'd like to analyze this not from the perspective of how the wine is removed, but from the perspective of what happens *afterward*.

Several sources - notably the oft-cited Kol Dodi, and Rav Shimon Eider as well - point out that the spilled wine is *not* reused, and that the cup *is* refilled. I do not understand why they need to tell us not to reuse the wine, and I do not understand why we shouldn't leave the cup alone, lacking a few drops.

Admittedly, I had always heard the argument of Binfol Oyivcha, and it was only a few years ago, here on Avodah that I became aware of those who argue against it. But my questions apply to BOTH sides:

According to those who support Binfol, isn't the whole point of removing these drops to show that the second cup, The Kos Of Geulah, is incomplete? Isn't the whole point to lessen our simcha, as Rav Yechezkel Abramsky was quoted above? Why would I even think of drinking those drops, or of refilling the cup? Please, do not respond with "because a kos shel bracha needs to be full." My point is that the very essence of this particular cup is that it should NOT be full [provided that it does have a reviis, I suppose]. (It is comparable to the Gra, who uses only one and a half loaves for Lechem Misheh on this particular occasion, because the essence of Lechem Oni requires it.)

And according to those who *reject* applying Binfol to this case, the question is even stronger. What is the point of removing the wine, if not to lessen our joy? Please don't respond with "because the wine symbolizes the makos", unless you can show how that symbolism developed BEFORE the practice of removing these drops began. It seems very plausible to me that we first got the practice of removing these drops for the makos (for whatever reason), and THEN people began referring to the drops themselves as "makos"; the reverse does not sound at all plausible to me.

Several posters have suggested that the symbolism derives from "Etzba Elokim", but I do not understand that. For "Etzba Elokim", we could raise or fingers in the air, or something like that. I see no connection from "Etzba Elokim" to the wine, and even if there is one, it would be lost when an ist'nis pour it off without using his finger.

All these questions lead me to believe that -- regardless of how to take Binfol -- there is some sort of connection between the makos and having less wine in the cup. (At least for Ashkenazim. If someone could elaborate on what is accomplished in the Sefardi practice of using vinegar, I'd appreciate it.)

Akiva Miller

____________________________________________________________
57-Year-Old Mom Looks 25
Mom Reveals $5 Wrinkle Trick That Has Angered Doctors!
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3131/4feb28cdbff87b631d7st01vuc



More information about the Avodah mailing list