7

Why does the Haggadah refer only to the 10th plague with "Makkat" and not by the other 9 plagues?

:אֵלּוּ עֶשֶׂר מַכּוֹת שֶׁהֵבִיא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עַל־הַמִּצְרִים בְּמִצְרַיִם, וְאֵלוּ הֵן
דָּם, צְפַרְדֵּעַ, כִּנִּים, עָרוֹב, דֶּבֶר, שְׁחִין, בָּרָד, אַרְבֶּה, חשֶׁךְ,
מַכַּת בְּכוֹרוֹת

  • 2
    Perhaps some we refer to it differently. – Dr. Shmuel May 29 at 15:24
  • 2
    There's a Wikipedia page titled מכת דם so I'm not sure your premise is accurate – Double AA May 29 at 15:25
  • 1
    If you say "Bechorot" only, I guess it's hard to understand it is a plague. But saying Makkat Bechorot, everybody may understand it is quite bad. – Eli83 May 29 at 15:32
  • 1
    @DoubleAA thus I refute thee youtube.com/watch?v=ZXp99kRUeIA – wfb May 29 at 16:02
  • 2
    @AlBerko In the hagada, for one place. It's a reasonable question, though the context could be made clearer. – Menachem May 29 at 23:26
5

The plague names are all for the substance of the plague. The plague came in the form of blood, frogs, etc. Bechorot would imply an infestation of firstborns.

  • 1
    I would change the last line into "BY firstborns themselves, not ON the firstborns." – Al Berko May 30 at 12:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .