Breaking the bones of the Korban Pesach: Enigma and possible solution
Whilst there was no 'Korban' Pesach in the formal sense in Egypt, many of the involved details can be explained as modelled on the world of Korbanot:[1]
1. The specific requirement regarding the
nature of the animal. It had to be a one-year old unblemished sheep (12:5).[2]
These requirements are otherwise found only in relation to sacrifices (see
Vayikra 22:20).
2. The requirement that the animal be ‘roasted
with its head on its entrails and legs’ (12:9) parallels the preparation of the Korban Chatat (see Vayikra 4:11).
3. The injunction against leftovers and
the requirement to burn any leftovers (see 12:10) corresponds to similar rules concerning the Korbanot.
4. The
absence of Chametz recalls the prohibition of bringing Chametz into contact with the Mizbe’ach.
5. The positive
requirement to eat matzah together with the
Pesach, corresponds to the
consumption of Matzah alongside many of the Korbanot.
6. The
smearing of the blood on the lintel and doorpost recalls the sprinkling of the
blood on the Mizbe’ach.
As discussed previously, the obvious missing component is the Mizbe’ach. Yet this is precisely
the point. Replacing the formal Mizbe’ach, is the home itself. The symbolic
implication is that each family unit is transformed into an object of sacrifice
as an expression of dedication. This also explains why there was such a strong injunction
against leaving the home that night (see 12:46). On a superficial level it
relates to a physical danger lurking on the outside, but the deeper point is the
story on the inside, which is the transformation of the home to a Mizbe’ach,
and the people to a nation. Like the Korbanot which need to stay on the
Mizbe’ach whilst they are burnt, so too everyone is required to stay within the
confines of the metaphorical Mizbe’ach of the home. Outside lies the culture of
Egypt, whilst on the inside, exists a sanctified space dedicated towards a very
different ideal. Each Jew is called to decide which side they are on.
This explains the role of house as a central point of focus in relation to the laws of the Korban Pesach as
well as the wider holiday. Throughout the holiday one’s home must be cleansed
of Chametz the same way that a Mizbe’ach may not receive any Chametz. The home-Mizbe’ach
paradigm is thereby an integral component of the annual celebration (Pesach Dorot)
much as it was for the original event (Pesach Mitzrayim).
Breaking the bones: an anomalous injunction
A particular law concerning the ‘Korban’ Pesach which cannot be
explained by way of the Korban analogy, is a law prohibiting the breaking of
the bones of the Pesach:
בְּבַיִת
אֶחָד יֵאָכֵל לֹא־תוֹצִיא מִן־הַבַּיִת מִן־הַבָּשָׂר חוּצָה וְעֶצֶם לֹא
תִשְׁבְּרוּ־בוֹ׃ (יב:מו)
Not only does this law not seem to share a parallel to the world of
Korbanot, but interpreting its significance is altogether challenging.
Rashbam and others linked the requirement to the atmosphere of haste (Chipazon)
which must accompany the Korban Pesach. Someone who eats in haste does not have
the leisure of breaking bones to extract the marrow. It seems far-fetched,
however, to assume that the injunction against breaking the bones is merely a
safeguard against eating the marrow (not mentioned anywhere in the text), which
itself is only significant in its apparent defiance of the Chipazon principle.[1] Moreover, the law against breaking the bones
appears in an entirely separate passage to the wider laws of Korban Pesach
containing the Chipazon principle, a point we will return too shortly. It
is worth noting that Tosfot (TB Pesachim 70a) states that the reason one must
eat the Korban Pesach in satiation - ‘al hasovah’- and not whilst hungry, is so
that one doesn’t rush and break the bones in the process. The exact opposite direction
to the Rashbam.
Another suggestion found in the medieval commentaries is that leaving
the bones intact would ensure that the lamb is still recognisable after it was
consumed, leaving no one in doubt regarding the humiliation of the Egyptian
god.[5]
This too seems forced. If this were truly the concern there should have been a
general injunction against discarding the bones altogether, or even a
requirement to publicly display them. Furthermore, the ritual as an act of
degradation does not sit well with the world of sacrifice which assumes an
affinity with the object of sacrifice. Finally, the suggested reason is temporal, located
within very tight circumstances, and would have little relevance within the
annual commemoration. This is particularly problematic as the law is mentioned
specifically in the context of Pesach Dorot and not Pesach Mitzrayim.
Korban Pesach and the sale of Yosef
To work towards an answer we will first explore some intriguing, but well established, connections
between the Korban Pesach and the sale of Yosef.
The sale of Yosef was a traumatic event which tore the family apart and sent Yosef into exile. As we
have discussed in a previous post, the word ‘house’ (Bayit) features as a
keyword in the Yosef story as he is transferred from one place to another in search
of a new home following his eviction. Seemingly, his search comes to an end
when Pharaoh brings him into the palace, provides him new clothes, a new name,
and a prominent Egyptian wife. The name given to Yosef’s eldest son suggests
Yosef has indeed found a new home to replace his old one:
וַיִּקְרָא יוֹסֵף
אֶת־שֵׁם הַבְּכוֹר מְנַשֶּׁה כִּי־נַשַּׁנִי אֱלֹהִים אֶת־כָּל־עֲמָלִי וְאֵת
כָּל־בֵּית אָבִי׃ (בראשית מא:נא)
But the truth turns out to be more complex.[6] Whilst Yosef adopts a new identity in Egypt, when all is said and done, he does not forget his roots. Although we (and perhaps Yosef as well) have doubts along the way, Yosef’s loyalty comes though clear and strong at the end of his life with his final recorded words:
וַיֹּאמֶר יוֹסֵף
אֶל־אֶחָיו אָנֹכִי מֵת וֵאלֹהִים פָּקֹד יִפְקֹד אֶתְכֶם וְהֶעֱלָה אֶתְכֶם
מִן־הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק
וּלְיַעֲקֹב׃ (בראשית נ:כד)
Against this background, the Korban Pesach acts as a healing process as each
family unites and collectively rediscovers its roots. As with the Yosef episodes,
the word Bayit is used intensely in the passages dealing with the Korban Pesach,
signifying this reversal.
There are other linguistic parallels between the sale of Yosef and Korban
Pesach. Most prominent is the ‘dipping’ and use of the blood of the goat as a
‘cover up’. In the sale of Yosef, the dipping of Yosef’s coat into the blood of
the slaughtered goat was used by the brothers in an attempted cover up and
deception:
וַיִּקְחוּ אֶת־כְּתֹנֶת יוֹסֵף וַיִּשְׁחֲטוּ שְׂעִיר עִזִּים וַיִּטְבְּלוּ אֶת־הַכֻּתֹּנֶת בַּדָּם׃ (לז:לא)
In the context of
the Korban Pesach, the act of dipping and displaying the slaughtered lamb/goat’s
blood also creates a ‘cover up’ for those performing the ritual. This time,
however, the blood is proudly displayed to God in an act of family unity and renewed
dedication. God sees the blood and protects those on the inside of the house
from the destruction on the outside.
וּלְקַחְתֶּם
אֲגֻדַּת אֵזוֹב וּטְבַלְתֶּם בַּדָּם אֲשֶׁר־בַּסַּף וְהִגַּעְתֶּם
אֶל־הַמַּשְׁקוֹף וְאֶל־שְׁתֵּי הַמְּזוּזֹת מִן־הַדָּם אֲשֶׁר בַּסָּף וְאַתֶּם
לֹא תֵצְאוּ אִישׁ מִפֶּתַח־בֵּיתוֹ עַד־בֹּקֶר׃ (יב:כב)
In view of the above, it
may well be – as R. Bahya (12:21) indeed suggests - that drawing in the lamb (מִשְׁכוּ וּקְחוּ
לָכֶם צֹאן לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתֵיכֶם) for
each family recalls – and symbolically reverses - the drawing out of Yosef (וַיִּמְשְׁכוּ וַיַּעֲלוּ אֶת־יוֹסֵף) from the pit to
advance the sale.
Symbolism of the bones
I would like to propose an extension of this idea to address the
question at hand. When Yosef dies, he receives a full Egyptian burial in the
tradition of the Egyptian elite. He is embalmed and placed in a coffin,
presumably within a sarcophagus. The embalming process was prolonged and highly
invasive, intended to preserve the physical body for as long as possible for its
continuation in the afterlife.[7]
According to the account of Yaakov’s own death, the embalming process
took 40 days. This should be contrasted with the Jewish requirement to bury
someone on the day of death (see TB Moed Katan 27b). The Jewish view does not seek
to glorify or artificially preserve the external body. Instead, it is the core
of a person - the ‘dry bones’ not prone to decay - which are the physical representation
of one’s eternal essence. The association of bones with a person’s core is the
basis for the wider usage of the word ‘Etzem’ to express the essence of someone
or something.
From an archaeological standpoint we now know that burial practice was a
notable point of divergence between the general Egyptian population and the
semitic migrants residing on the eastern Delta. The graves discovered at
Avaris, which was the capital of the eastern Delta during the Hyksos period,
were constructed from mudbrick, as was typical in Canaan, as opposed to stone
as per the Egyptian custom. More relevant for our purposes, the bodies were
placed directly in these tombs without a coffin or sarcophagus.[8]
Yosef being embalmed and laid to rest within a coffin and/or sarcophagus, placed
him resolutely on the Egyptian side of the cultural divide. For this reason, we
should take careful note of Yosef’s choice of words:
וַיַּשְׁבַּע
יוֹסֵף אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר פָּקֹד יִפְקֹד אֱלֹהִים אֶתְכֶם וְהַעֲלִתֶם
אֶת־עַצְמֹתַי מִזֶּה׃ וַיָּמָת יוֹסֵף בֶּן־מֵאָה וָעֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים
וַיַּחַנְטוּ אֹתוֹ וַיִּישֶׂם בָּאָרוֹן בְּמִצְרָיִם׃ (בראשית
נ:כה-כו)
Yosef only mentions his bones and makes no reference to the coffin. When the
Israelites fulfil Yosef’s request two centuries later, there is again no
reference to the coffin, only to the bones. Even if they didn’t physically
remove the bones from the coffin, the emphasis on the bones in place of the coffin
is instructive. Removing Yosef’s bones from his Egyptian tomb (at least from a
literary perspective) and interring him in the land of Israel, symbolically
strips away his Egyptian character and reveals his core identity.[9]
Preserving the bones of the Korban Pesach speaks to this very idea. Given
the significant parallels between the Korban Pesach and the sale of Yosef, it seems
reasonable to suggest that preserving the bones whilst the flesh is consumed, establishes
a connection with Yosef’s request to take care of his bones. We must remember
that the nature of a Korban entails an expression of human devotion via the
sacrifice of the animal. The meaning of the sacrifice should therefore be located
within the emotions of the person responsible for the sacrifice. This is true even
more so when it comes to the Korban Pesach, where the people themselves stand as
virtual offerings on the metaphorical Mizbe’ach. If bones represent the core
identity of a person which do not decompose, then this is a fitting parable to
the inner Jewish spirit which remains alive even after centuries of exile. No
person models this better than Yosef in his own life. In light of the wider
symbolism of the Korban Pesach as an act of dedication of the Jewish home and simultaneous
rejection of Egyptian culture, the association with Yosef’s bones strongly
reinforces that motif.
This suggestion is perhaps corroborated by the familiar imagery of the
burning bush. There too it is correct to associate the survival of the bush
amongst the flames, with the endurance of the Jewish people. It must be added,
however, that this is prescriptive as well as descriptive. The bones may be
innately durable but there is nevertheless a command not to break them.
As mentioned earlier, the injunction against breaking the bones does not
appear alongside the primary laws relating to the manner of preparing and
eating the Korban Pesach. Instead, it appears sandwiched between the categories
of people that are permitted to eat from the Korban Pesach.
Why is this particular law which concerns how to eat the korban
pesach attached to the laws concerning who may eat from the Pesach.
Based on what we have said we may suggest that the common denominator revolves
around identity. For someone to be eligible to participate in the Korban Pesach
he must be a member of, or affiliated to, the ‘community of Israel’ (Adat
Yisrael – see 12:47), which includes the requirement of Brit Milah. This is the
physical mark which links one to the covenant and through which one shares in the
destiny of the Jewish people. As mentioned before, those principles of identity
and destiny are represented in the bones of Yosef and embedded in the
requirement to preserve the bones of the Korban Pesach.
BeEtzem HaYom HaZeh
We will end the discussion with reference to another wordplay which perhaps
supports our suggestion. It does not seem coincidental that the same word ‘Etzem’
appears immediately before, and immediately after, the passage containing the
prohibition Ve’Etzem Lo Tishberu Bo:
וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ
שְׁלֹשִׁים שָׁנָה וְאַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַיְהִי בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה
יָצְאוּ כָּל־צִבְאוֹת יְהוָה מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם׃ )יב:מא(
וַיְהִי בְּעֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה הוֹצִיא יְהוָה אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם עַל־צִבְאֹתָם׃ )יב:נא(
Is this just literary enhancement or is there something deeper? The emphasis
that the exodus occurred ‘BeEtzem HaYom HaZeh’, after exactly 430 years,
reflects the fact that the end of the exile was preplanned and foretold in the Brit
Bein HaBetarim.[10]
When Yosef instructed for his bones to be taken out of Egypt as they
leave Egypt, he speaks with certainty that God will eventually remember and
redeem the nation. He knows this to be true because he is familiar with the content
of the covenant which was relayed to him by Yaakov. The request for his bones
to be brought up from Egypt is therefore inextricably linked with the
fulfilment of the covenant and Yosef makes this connection explicitly. He promises
that God will remember the people and ‘bring up’ the people from the land, whilst
adjuring the nation to ‘bring up’ his bones when that time comes. If the
requirement to keep the bones intact harks back to the message of inner loyalty
as symbolised by the preservation of Yosef’s bones, then the notion of BeEtzem
HaYom Hazeh is the counterpart which expresses the durability of God’s covenant.
In other words, the Etzem which signifies the fulfilment of the
covenant, creates a contact point with the Etzem of the Korban Pesach which alludes
to the perseverance of Jewish identity. It is this identity which enables, and
is enabled by, the covenant.
[1] For reasons
of familiarity, we will refer to the Pesach ritual – even as practiced in Egypt
(Pesach Mitzrayim in Mishnaic parlance) - as ‘Korban Pesach’.
[2] Verse references are to Shemot unless stated otherwise
[3] Rashbam
(12:46) does not directly refer to the marrow, but it seems to underly his
comments and is explicit in the commentaries of Bechor Shor and Chizkuni. See
also Rashbam 12:8 and 12:9.
[4] Though Shadal
(12:46) had no problem listing this reason alongside Rashbam’s reason.
[7] See here
for summary of the process: https://discoveringegypt.com/egyptian-mummification/
[9] Jonathan
Grossman, Yosef: Sippuram Shel Chalomot, (Yediot, 2022), final chapter.
[10] We need not
delve here into the discrepancy between the 400 and 430
