What is the definition of "Eizov"? How large must it be?
Rashi: It is a species of herb with stalks. 1
Mechilta: It refers to a generic (Stam) Eizov (which has no descriptive title - such as 'a Greek Eizov,' 'a Roman Eizov,' 'a Kuchal 2 Eizov' or 'a desert Eizov'). It must be large enough to dip into the blood (and sprinkle on to the lintel and the two door-posts - Torah Temimah).
What is an "Agudas Eizov"?
Rashi: It is a bunch of hyssop comprising three 1 twigs.
Why did the bundle of hyssop have to be bound together?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 139): A Mitzvah that requires Lekichah (taking), requires binding; a bundle is something that one takes by hand. 1
I.e., the purpose of the binding is to facilitate this; the binding designates it for this purpose. (For example, the Mitzvah of taking the Four Species on Sukos.)
Why was Ezov (hyssop) used specifically? What does Ezov represent?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 139): Ezov is a very small plant; one can easily bind it. 1
Gur Aryeh (to Vayikra 14:4): (Other Mitzvos, such as the purification of the Metzora, require three items - Erez (a cedar stick), Sheni Tola'as (red-dyed wool), and Ezov.) The Ezov is not as lowly as a Tola'as (lit., a worm), nor is it as lofty as cedar; rather, it is the median of the three. The middle path is the approach to Midos that a person should usually take. See Rambam (Intro. to Avos, Ch. 4). 2
Perhaps this means that due to its lowliness, one Ezov alone would be insignificant, were it not three stems bound together. Binding indicates readiness to serve some greater purpose. (EK) Maharal - (Derush l'Shabbos Ha'Gadol, p. 212) - The hyssop, and the blood in the "Saf," represent the lowliness of Yisrael -- and that is what brought their redemption. Refer to 12:7:3.1:2.
Rashi (loc. cit.): The Metzora was afflicted with Tzara'as due to his haughtiness. In order to heal himself, he must now humble himself like the worm and the hyssop. Gur Aryeh (ibid.) explains - In order to accomplish this, the Metzora must first go to the opposite extreme, to be low as a worm. Then, he may raise himself to the level of an Ezov.
What is the definition of 'Saf'?
Rashi #1, Rashbam and Targum Onkelos: A vessel. 1
Rashi #2 (to Yirmeyah 52:19): A bowl (or basin) to receive the blood.
Targum Yonasan: An earthenware vessel.
Yerushalmi Pesachim, 9:5: It is either a vessel; or, it could mean 'a threshold.' 2
Rashi: As in the verses "Sipos Kesef" (Melachim II 12:14). Rashbam - Also "Shomerei ha'Saf" (Esther 2:21).
Yerushalmi (loc. cit.): In which case, "Min ha'Dam Asher ba'Saf" means 'from the vessel that he placed on the threshold (of the house).'
Why does the Torah add the words "Asher ba'Saf" (see Torah Temimah, note 191)?
Mechilta: To teach us that, when dipping the hyssop into the bowl, it must contain sufficient blood for it to sprinkle on the doorpost and the two lintels.
Oznayim la'Torah: It is likely that this was a Kaparah for the sin of dipping Yosef's tunic (the Kesones Pasim) in goat's blood - which caused the Galus, 1 and which was now being atoned for prior to their leaving.
Oznayim la'Torah: Bearing in mind that the word 'Pas' (the root of "Pasim" - Bereishis 37:31-32) in reverse reads "Saf."
In general, the previous section (12:1-20) was Hashem's command to Moshe; which is reflected in this section (12:21-28) - Moshe's words to the nation. Why weren't the details in this Pasuk - e.g. the bundle of hyssop, which had to be dipped into the "Saf" - mentioned in the above section as well?
Maharal #1 (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 138): This passage serves as a Binyan Av for general Torah topics - namely, that all Mitzvos involving "taking" 1 require binding, and that Kabalas ha'Dam requires a vessel. That is why they were not mentioned in the above section, which primarily dealt with the Korban Pesach specifically.
Maharal #2 (Derashah l'Shabbos Ha'Gadol, p. 212): Conceptually, the preceding section, which was Hashem's command, 2 omitted mention of any items that allude to the lowliness 3 of Yisrael among the nations - so as not to imply that Yisrael is low even in the eyes of Hashem (Who is lofty and uplifted). On the contrary - Yisrael is important, because it is Hashem Who raises them up! 4
E.g., the four species on Sukos, and the various items needed for the purification of the Metzora, or the burning of the Parah Adumah.
The preceding section (12:2-20) is the words of Hashem to Yisrael (refer to 12:12:7.1:1*). This section (12:21-28) is an additional charge that Moshe gave Yisrael to perform the Korban Pesach; also refer to 12:22:1.32:1.
Maharal (loc. cit.): Such as the lowly Ezov. The word "Saf" also means "threshold" - which everyone steps on. (To some opinions in the Midrash, the Mitzvah was to dig a basin next to the threshold of the house and slaughter the Pesach there; or, that any leftover blood in the vessel was to be poured on the threshold.) Thus, "Saf" indicates lowliness as well. And even to the opinion (which Rashi cites) that "Saf" means a vessel, in which the blood was caught and collected (Kanus), this represents 'Keneses' Yisrael. The vessel would have to be set down [on the ground] below, to facilitate reaching up ("v'Higa'tem") to the lintel.
Indeed, it is because we lower ourselves, that Hashem raises us up to the level of the Avos. That is the symbolism of the lintel and the doorposts; refer to 12:7:3.1:2 and its notes.
Why does Moshe devote this verse to the details of the Ezov, rather than to the laws of the Korban Pesach itself?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 139): Certainly, Moshe relayed the entire above section (12:2-20), with all of its laws of the Korban Pesach, to the Bnei Yisrael. The Torah need not repeat it! This section serves as [additional] warning to the Bnei Yisrael, not to hold back from offering the Korban Pesach -- even if they feel themselves under duress -- lest they risk being hit by Makas Bechoros. 1
Maharal: That is why this section mentions the hyssop, and the prohibition to leave their homes until morning - elements through which they would be saved from the plague.
Why, in Pasuk 12:7, did the Torah reverse the order, and write "v'Nasenu Al Shtei ha'Mezuzos v'Al ha'Mashkof"? Why does our verse use the verb "v'Higa'tem" (to touch [the blood to the doorway]), whereas verse 12:7 used "v'Nasenu" (to place)?
Mechilta: To teach us that one is Yotzei in whichever order one places the blood.
Oznayim la'Torah: The Torah wrote "v'Nasenu al Shtei ha'Mezuzos" (12:7), because it was possible to actually place the blood on the doorposts, but here it writes "v'Higa'tem El ha'Mashkof" - because, due to the height of the doorposts they would have to sprinkle the blood on to the lintel. See also Torah Temimah, note 193.
Maharal (Derashah l'Shabbos Ha'Gadol, p. 212): After our verse mentions the Ezov, which represents the lowliness of Yisrael, 1 it must raise them up again! That is why the lintel (high above the doorway) is mentioned first, and the verb "v'Higa'tem" (from l'Hagi'a - to reach) is used. (Verse 12:7 did not specify using Ezov, so it need not do so.)
See 12:22:1.31:2, as well as 12:22:1.12 and 12:7:3.1:2, with their notes.
Why does the Pasuk repeat "Min ha'Dam Asher ba'Saf"?
Rashi and Seforno: To teach us that each time one placed blood (first on the lintel and then on the two doorposts), he had to dip the hyssop into the bowl of blood afresh before placing it again. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 194. See also Oznayim la'Torah.
Why did Hashem instruct Yisrael not to leave their houses the entire night?
Rashi: Because when the destructive angel is authorized to kill en-masse, he does not differentiate between Tzadik and Rasha. 1 Therefore, Hashem ordered them to remain indoors (where they were protected by the blood on their doorposts). 2
Moshav Zekenim: Refer to 12:23:1:7.
Bava Kama 60b: To teach us that, when Dever strikes a town, one should stay at home (and not venture outside). 3
Rashi: And nighttime is when the destructive angel strikes, as the Pasuk writes, "Bo Sirmos Kol Chayso Ya'ar" (Tehilim 104:20).
Where the angel was forbidden to enter (as the next Pasuk states.
See Torah Temimah, note 195.
What are the implications of "Lo Seitze'u... Ad Boker"?
Bava Kama 60b: It implies that one should arrive at one's destination before sunset, and avoid setting out in the morning before Hanetz ha'Chamah. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 197. Rashi to Berachos 5a interprets "Ad Boker" as 'until Amud ha'Shachar (dawnbreak).'
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "No man shall leave the entrance to his house until morning - ... Once the destroyer (Mashchis) has been given permission to cause damage, it does not differentiate between the righteous and the wicked." But the reason to remain inside their homes, is found in the next Pasuk (12:23) - While inside their homes, the Jews were protected from the Makah, by the Dam of the Pesach they had put at their doors; but were they to leave, they would lose that protection?
Gur Aryeh: The plague would begin only at midnight (11:4-5). If the concern was only for Makas Bechoros itself, why were they prohibited to leave their homes the entire night? It must be because nighttime (as a whole, in general) is a time of destructive forces. 1
Gur Aryeh concedes, however, that we need not explain the Pasuk like Rashi. It is possible that although the Makah would strike only at midnight, the accompanying "Mashchis" was given free reign throughout this night - but not necessarily so on a regular night.
Rashi writes: " ... Once the Mashchis has been given permission to cause damage, it does not differentiate... Nighttime [itself] is permission for the damaging forces, as the verse says, 'You emplace darkness and it becomes night, when all the beasts of the forest creep' (Tehilim 104:20)." Ramban asks - If so, we should never be permitted to leave our homes at night!
Ramban (to 12:21): Makas Bechoros was carried out by Hashem Himself. But the Bnei Yisrael would still have to take caution from the destructive agents that accompanied Him, for the latter would not differentiate between the righteous and the wicked. Indeed, we may derive from that every night is a time for predatory beings. 1
Gur Aryeh: It is true that night is the time of destructive forces, but such incidents are infrequent. Only on that particular night of Makas Bechoros, was it known that there would be all types of "Mashchis" throughout Egypt - so the Torah forbade leaving one's home (the entire night).
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 139): On all other nights, the destructive agents are not given permission to cause harm. On this night when Hashem Himself struck the firstborn, the destructive forces were likewise given permission to cause damage.
Ramban (citing Mechilta): We learn proper conduct (Derech Eretz) from our Avos and Nevi'im, who embarked on their journeys only in the morning (also see Pesachim 2a). Gur Aryeh - Nevertheless, the prohibition to leave their homes that night was not merely due to Derech Eretz, but rather because of the destructive forces -- for Derech Eretz dictates that 'one may not rely on miracles.' Also see Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Derech Eretz end Ch. 1).
Rashi writes: "No man shall leave the entrance to his house until morning - ... Once the destroyer (Mashchis) has been given permission to cause damage, it does not differentiate.... Nighttime [itself] is permission for the damaging forces." If so, what would be gained by remaining indoors?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 139): The Mashchis was not given permission to enter their homes.
Gur Aryeh (to Bereishis 6:13): If a Tzadik is found among the Resha'im, 1 the Mashchis does not distinguish, and may bring harm to them all. As long as the Tzadik separates himself from the Resha'im, he is no danger. 2
Rashi writes: "Once the destroyer (Mashchis) has been given permission to cause damage...." Why were destructive forces present on this night? Rashi (to 12:12) wrote above, that Hashem Himself would carry out Makas Bechoros - not through any messenger?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem Ch. 37, p. 139): Once Hashem came to strike Egypt, the destructive forces were drawn to there as well.
Gur Aryeh #1: Hashem struck the Bechorim himself; and His strike was prior to, and more extensive than, that of the destructive forces (the Mashchis). Hashem struck only at Egypt; whereas the Mashchis could have stricken Yisrael [had they not been under Hashem's protection, due to the Mitzvah of Korban Pesach].
Gur Aryeh #2: It would not be in Hashem's honor to Himself strike Egypt; rather, He acted through the Mashchis. As for the Midrash of Chazal (see Rashi to 12:12) that Hashem said 'I Myself - and not through a Shali'ach,' this means that the deed would be associated with Him. To illustrate, when a royal official does something, it is attributed to that official; but when the king's slave acts upon the king's orders, it is as if the king did so himself.
