Halacha and legend

It is true that it is simple for him, and it is true that he explained the Haggadah. The question is whether after he explained it, it became equivalent or not. And I would be happy if the rabbi could explain what this identity is.

I don't know how to explain this identity. When they say this and that are one, they mean that there is an intimate connection between them, but that doesn't mean that there is identity. And when there are two different things that are identical to a third thing, they are not identical to each other. See column 397 on the work of a builder.

Hi, I don't like digging up a question from two weeks ago. But I just saw Nefesh HaChaim again in Shad 1:2, and all his words there that cite King David are not brought as proof that agga is less than learning, etc., but only that the main thing in learning is to work hard and educate him and not to feel clinging. But there is no connection to the issue of halakha and agga, and as he cites a midrash there to prove against the concept of clinging (which is embodied by reading the Psalms) that says that we need to learn everything, and in the midrash there even agga appears. And so again, seemingly, there is no proof from the soul of life that a legend is less than a halakha, leading to the conclusion, only what he wrote, “and even if he is concerned with matters of legend that do not have any basis in law, he is still adhering to the word of the Holy One, blessed be He.” And so, it is a mistaken belief that has been rejected and the conclusion that you are also adhering to it. And so what the Rabbi wanted to prove in the first reply from King David is seemingly no proof at all.

The relationship between halakha and agga is seen there in several places. Halakha is also the will of God, and the agga is only the word of God. The example of Negim and Tehillim was brought to show that the goal is adherence to the essence of learning and not experience. But adherence to learning is mainly about halakha. The agga is more capable of creating an experience. But you are right that it is not written there directly, but only indirectly.