EXODUS
\nExodus 1:1\u20135
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is the information already provided in Gen. 46:8\u201327 repeated in Exod. 1:1\u20138?
\n\u2666 Why does v. 5 tell us what we already know, that Joseph is in Egypt?
\nExodus 1:1
\nRASHI
\nThese are the names of the sons of Israel. Even though the Torah listed them by name during their lifetimes (Gen. 46:8\u201327), it lists them again after their deaths to show God\u2019s love for them, by likening them to the stars. For God musters the stars at their rising and their setting by number and by name: \u201cWho created these? He who sends out their host by count, who calls them each by name\u201d (Isa. 40:26).
\nRASHBAM
\nThese are the names. Because the text wants to emphasize that \u201cthe Israelites were fertile and prolific\u201d (v. 7), it was necessary to repeat that, when they came to Egypt, there were no more than 70 of them. But after the death of that generation, they were \u201cfertile and prolific,\u201d and \u201ca new king arose\u201d (v. 8) who tried to deal shrewdly with them in order to diminish their numbers\u2014but it did him no good.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThese are the names. Literally, \u201cand these are the names.\u201d Having mentioned at the end of Genesis that Joseph lived to see his great-grandchildren, the text continues now by noting that his brothers, too, were few in number when they came down to Egypt, but were fertile and prolific there. With Jacob. Including Jacob. The total of persons \u201cof Jacob\u2019s issue\u201d (v. 5) only makes 70 if Jacob himself is included in the total. With his household. That is, his \u201cissue.\u201d Biblical Hebrew never uses the word \u201chouse\u201d as a euphemism for \u201cwife\u201d the way rabbinic Hebrew sometimes does.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nGenesis concludes at this point, being the book of creation, which tells of the origin of the world and the creation of everything, and of those incidents from the lives of all the Patriarchs that would be, as it were, formative for their offspring. For all those incidents that are depicted hint at what would happen to their offspring in the future. After completing the story of creation, the Torah begins a new book to tell the story that follows from those allusions. The unifying theme of the Book of Exodus is the first exile\u2014the one decreed in Gen. 15:13\u2014and of the redemption from that exile. For this reason it begins with a recapitulation of the names and number of those who came down to Egypt, even though this had already been detailed in Gen. 46:8\u201327, since their descent there was actually the beginning of that exile.
\nNow, that exile would not be over until the day the Israelites returned both to their place and to the status of their ancestors. When they left Egypt, even though they were emancipated from slavery, they were still considered to be in exile, for they were in \u201ca land not theirs\u201d (Gen. 15:13) and \u201castray in the wilderness\u201d (14:3). When they came to Mount Sinai and made the Tabernacle, and the Holy One once again caused his Shekhinah to rest among them, they then returned to the status of their ancestors, \u201cwhen God\u2019s company graced their tents\u201d (Job 29:4)\u2014for as our Sages said, \u201cThe Patriarchs are the chariot.\u201d Then they were considered to be redeemed. That is why the Book of Exodus concludes with the completion of the Tabernacle and its being always filled with the Presence of God.
\nThese are the names. The text wishes to count the time of their descent to Egypt as the beginning of the exile, for \u201cthey headed the column of exiles\u201d (Amos 6:7), as I have explained in the introduction. So it returns to the beginning of that theme in the verse \u201che brought with him to Egypt all his offspring\u201d (Gen. 46:7), which is immediately followed by the phrase \u201cThese are the names of the sons of Israel who came to Egypt\u201d (Gen. 46:8) with which our chapter begins. For even though Genesis and Exodus are two separate books, Exodus is the sequel to Genesis. So only the introductory statement and the concluding one, \u201cThe total number of persons that were of Jacob\u2019s issue came to seventy\u201d (Gen. 46:27), are repeated here, not the details. A similar repetition links the book of Chronicles, which concludes with the promise of the rebuilding of the Temple, with its sequel, the book of Ezra-Nehemiah, where that story is told. The link between Genesis and Exodus is made the same way. Ibn Ezra says that because Gen. 50:23 tells us that Joseph lived to see his great-grandchildren, Exodus begins by noting that his brothers, too, were few when they came to Egypt, but were fruitful and prolific there. But this is incorrect. Rashi\u2019s explanation, that counting them twice likens them to the stars, is midrashic. It is certainly true with respect to the love God showed for them by repeating their names over and over again. But the literary connection is as I have explained. That is why Exodus literally begins by saying \u201cAnd these are the names\u201d\u2014to establish the link with Genesis.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThese are the names. These people were \u201cstars\u201d all their lives, and deserved to be individually recognized; their descendants were not so distinguished (Sforno).
\nExodus 1:2
\nIBN EZRA
\nReuben. The tribes are listed in birth order.
\nExodus 1:3
\nIBN EZRA
\nBenjamin. Being the son of one of the Matriarchs, Benjamin is listed before his older brothers who were the sons of the concubines, Bilhah and Zilpah.
\nExodus 1:5
\nRASHI
\nJoseph being already in Egypt. Since he and his sons are included in the total of \u201cseventy,\u201d what does this additional phrase come to teach us? Don\u2019t we already know that he is in Egypt? It comes to let you know about Joseph\u2019s righteousness: The very Joseph who was a shepherd with his father\u2019s sheep was the same Joseph who was in Egypt, became king, and remained as righteous as he had been.
\nIBN EZRA
\nOf Jacob\u2019s issue. OJPS \u201cout of the loins of Jacob.\u201d \u201cLoins\u201d is a euphemism here for the genitals. There were a total of 69 males \u201cof Jacob\u2019s issue,\u201d which is why they were said in v. 1 to have come \u201cwith Jacob\u201d (see my comment to that verse); the parallel passage in Gen. 46:8 says more plainly, \u201cJacob and his descendants.\u201d As Deut. 10:22 puts it, \u201cYour ancestors went down to Egypt seventy persons in all,\u201d including both Jacob and Joseph and Joseph\u2019s sons, Ephraim and Manasseh.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSeventy. The number is given to emphasize God\u2019s miracle: in only 210 years, the 70 grew into 600,000 (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 1:6\u201310
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 It would seem that v. 8, \u201cA new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph,\u201d should immediately follow v. 6, \u201cJoseph died.\u201d Why does the text insert the verse about the Israelites\u2019 fertility (which we know about already, anyway, from Gen. 47:27) in between them?
\n\u2666 Since Pharaoh already thought that the Israelites were \u201ctoo numerous for us\u201d (v. 9), why does v. 10 say that he was worried that they would increase?
\n\u2666 What does \u201cthe event of war\u201d (v. 10) have to do with it? Why wasn\u2019t Pharaoh afraid they themselves would conquer Egypt?
\n\u2666 Why would Pharaoh worry that the Israelites would \u201cget them up out of the land\u201d (OJPS)? He should be delighted that they would leave!
\nExodus 1:6
\nRASHBAM
\nAll that generation. The 70 people.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAll that generation. Since the text has already mentioned the death of Joseph and all his brothers, this phrase must mean \u201call the Egyptians of that generation.\u201d This is proven by the fact that the king in v. 8 \u201cdid not know Joseph.\u201d A biblical \u201cgeneration\u201d is a genealogical reference (i.e., father and son are two generations); it does not indicate a period of time.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAll that generation. Had any at all of the Egyptians who knew Joseph still been alive, the new king (v. 8) would not have been able to do what he did (Gersonides).
\nExodus 1:7
\nRASHI
\nFertile. Their women did not miscarry, and they did not die as infants. Prolific. They would have sextuplets.
\nRASHBAM
\nFertile. With regard to conception. Prolific. With regard to birth. Thus the womb would not miscarry. The root meaning of the word is \u201ccrawl,\u201d as if it meant here \u201cto produce crawlers\u201d\u2014for little children, like all small creatures, crawl on the ground. Multiplied. Rather, they \u201cgot big\u201d; the little ones grew up and did not die in childhood. Increased. They did not die as grown men, but lived long and increased very greatly, to the extent that the land was filled with them, as the Temple court \u201cwas filled with the radiance of the Presence of the Lord\u201d (Ezek. 10:4) and \u201cthe skirts of His robe filled the Temple\u201d (Isa. 6:1).
\nIBN EZRA
\nProlific. The verb used is the same used in the story of Noah and his sons; it is translated \u201cswarm\u201d in Gen. 8:17 and \u201cabound\u201d in Gen. 9:7. It may mean that the women gave birth to twins or more; I myself have seen a woman who gave birth to quadruplets, and there is medical evidence for up to septuplets. But the story in The Chronicles of Moses about Jewish mothers giving birth in the fields like animals (and angels bringing the boys to them after they were grown) is nonsense; this is neither a holy book nor one of authentic tradition. Very greatly. Those who are impressed by the fact that the numerical value of this expression in Hebrew, used in Gen. 17:20 with reference to Ishmael, is the same as that of \u201cMuhammad\u201d\u2014what do they do with this verse, where exactly the same phrase is applied to Israel? God forbid that Moses should speak in numerological riddles! The land was filled with them. \u201cLand\u201d has the sense of \u201cthe whole land of Egypt\u201d (rather than \u201cthe earth,\u201d which the Hebrew word could also mean).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nFertile and prolific. In accordance with God\u2019s promise (Gen. 46:3), \u201cI will make you there into a great nation\u201d (Hizkuni). Increased. In size (Gersonides).
\nExodus 1:8
\nRASHI
\nA new king arose. Rab and Samuel dispute over whether this was literally a new king, or the old king (whose death is not recorded) issuing new decrees. Who did not know Joseph. If it was the old king, this would mean that he acted as if he did not know him.
\nIBN EZRA
\nA new king arose. \u201cA new king\u201d means just what it sounds like it means\u2014there is no need to add the complication of an old king with new decrees here. But \u201carose\u201d implies that he was not related to the previous king.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA new king arose. If this is the old king, then \u201carose\u201d implies that he \u201crose\u201d against Israel like an enemy (Hizkuni). Who did not know Joseph. Though he was undoubtedly recorded in the annals in connection with the imposition of the 20% agricultural tax (Gen. 47:26), it never occurred to the new Pharaoh that he could have been a Hebrew (Sforno).
\nExodus 1:9
\nRASHI
\nHe said. It was Pharaoh who initiated the plan.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHis people. The Egyptians.
\nExodus 1:10
\nRASHI
\nLet us deal shrewdly with them. The text literally says lo, which could mean \u201cwith it\u201d (the people); but our Sages interpret it as dealing shrewdly \u201cwith Him,\u201d with the Savior of Israel. Knowing that God punishes measure for measure, they thought: If we kill the children by fire, we can be killed by fire; if by the sword, we can be killed by the sword. But it is safe to kill them by water, for He has already sworn never again to destroy the world by water. Rise from the ground. That is, leave the country\u2014against our will. But our Sages think their real fear was that they themselves would be forced to leave their own land and that it would be taken over by the Israelites, but that they did not say \u201clest we rise from the ground\u201d so as not to invoke the Evil Eye.
\nRASHBAM
\nLet us deal shrewdly with them. So that they do not increase. For if they increase, then in the event of war with our enemies, they may join our enemies in fighting against us and rise from the ground to return to the land of their ancestors. It would not be good for us to lose our slaves and be called \u201ca crippled kingdom.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nLet us deal shrewdly with them. That is, let us seek a wise course that will prevent them from increasing. In the event of war. The word translated here as \u201cevent\u201d is plural, though \u201cwar\u201d is singular, but this is not uncommon. Or perhaps it implies \u201cwar and trouble\u201d or the like. They may \u2026 rise from the ground. That is (with OJPS), \u201cget them up out of the land.\u201d Ibn Janah says what Pharaoh really meant was \u201cget us up out of the land,\u201d but he did not wish to give Satan an opportunity to make his words come true by pronouncing them aloud. But I think it is to be understood as written.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nLet us deal shrewdly with them. Pharaoh and \u201cthe sagest of his advisers\u201d (Isa. 19:11) did not consider slaying them outright, for to do so without cause would be an enormous betrayal of a people that had come down to Egypt in the first place by command of the previous king. Moreover, the Egyptian people (for he consulted their opinion as well) would not have let the king commit such gratuitous violence, especially since the Israelites were \u201ctoo numerous\u201d (v. 9) and could fight a mighty battle against them. Instead, Pharaoh said, they should act cleverly, so that the Israelites would not sense that they were acting out of enmity toward them. So he set them to do forced labor, as is the custom for those resident in someone else\u2019s land. Solomon did the same thing (2 Chron. 2:16\u201317, 8:7\u20138). Afterward (v. 15), Pharaoh secretly commanded the midwives to kill the male children at birth in such a way that even the women who gave birth would not realize that the children had not simply been born dead. Finally (v. 22), he commanded his entire people, \u201cEvery boy that is born you shall throw into the Nile.\u201d He did not want to order his own executioners to kill them or cast them into the Nile, but told his people to do it whenever any of them found a Jewish boy, and if the boy\u2019s father should cry out to the king or to the governor of the city for justice, they would tell him to bring witnesses and they would avenge the boy\u2019s death. Once the royal restraint against murder was relaxed, the Egyptians would find Israelite houses, go into them at night in disguise, and remove the children. That is why it says that Moses\u2019 mother \u201ccould hide him no longer\u201d (2:3). Apparently this only went on for a short time, for the decree was obviously not in force yet when Aaron was born, and it would seem to have been abrogated by the time of Moses\u2019 birth. Perhaps Pharaoh\u2019s daughter asked her father out of pity not to apply it to Moses, or perhaps when it was revealed to be a royal order, he canceled it. Or perhaps the astrologers had canceled the decree, as our Sages wrote. But it was all arranged to be done subtly, so that they would not realize that the violence was being directed against them as a people. This explains why the Israelite foremen told Moses, \u201cMay the Lord look upon you and punish you for making us loathsome to Pharaoh and his courtiers\u2014putting a sword in their hands to slay us\u201d (5:21)\u2014now they will increase their hatred of us and, under the pretext that we are rebelling against the kingdom, they will slay us publicly, and will no longer need to keep their violence covert. They may \u2026 rise from the ground. Rather, \u201cfrom the land.\u201d Rashi, following the Sages, explains it to mean \u201cWe [the Egyptians] may rise from the land,\u201d that is, be expelled against our will. But if it meant this, the text would say \u201cThey may rise up against the land,\u201d as in 2 Kings 18:13. Perhaps Pharaoh is saying, \u201cThey may rise up against us from the land where they are dwelling\u2014the land of Goshen.\u201d Or he might be explained as saying, \u201cin the event of war they will join our enemies in plundering us and get themselves up out of this land to the land of Canaan with everything we possess, and we will be unable to revenge ourselves upon them.\u201d This would match the usage in 32:1, \u201cMoses who brought us up from the land of Egypt,\u201d and see similarly Jer. 23:8 and Hosea 2:2.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nLet us deal shrewdly with them. Let us enslave them now, when it is unnecessary, so they are enslaved if it ever becomes necessary (Bekhor Shor). They may join our enemies. They are so different from us in language and culture\u2014not to mention circumcision\u2014that they would certainly reveal their hatred of us if war broke out (Sforno). Rise from the ground. Rise over us and enslave us (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 1:11\u201312
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 One can understand why the Egyptians might be apprehensive, but why would they \u201cdread\u201d (v. 12) the Israelites?
\nExodus 1:11
\nRASHI
\nTaskmasters. Literally, \u201ctax masters\u201d\u2014officials who would collect the tax from them. And what was this \u201ctax\u201d? That they should build store-cities for Pharaoh. To oppress them with forced labor. Literally, \u201cwith their forced labor\u201d\u2014that is, with the Egyptians\u2019 labor that they forced upon the Israelites. Garrison cities. Rather, \u201cstore-cities,\u201d as Onkelos and OJPS have it. That this is the correct meaning is shown by Isa. 22:15, where the same root is used for the \u201csteward\u201d of the palace. Pithom and Raamses. The cities already existed under those names, but they were not suitable for use as store-cities until they strengthened and fortified them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey\u2014the Egyptians\u2014set taskmasters over them to oppress them. To dry up the men\u2019s seed. Raamses. As I have already explained at Gen. 47:1, this is not to be confused with Rameses, the region in Goshen where the Israelites dwelt. Saadia explains the name to mean \u201cEye of the Sun.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nTaskmasters \u2026 to oppress them. He set the people to forced labor, that is, he seized some of them for the king\u2019s work. He appointed over them Egyptian taskmasters to seize Israelite men at their own discretion, according to the amount of work that needed to be done. For a month or more at a time they would work on the king\u2019s construction projects, and the rest of the time they would be in their homes. These taskmasters commanded them to build cities for Pharaoh, and they built garrison cities for Pharaoh under this system of forced labor.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nTo oppress them. To fulfill Gen. 15:13, \u201cthey shall be \u2026 oppressed four hundred years\u201d; \u201coppression\u201d in this context refers to forced celibacy (Hizkuni). In order to get them to leave the country (Sforno). Forced labor. It would seem that at first this simply involved paying a fixed amount to the king on a regular basis. One who could not afford to pay would fulfill his obligation by doing construction work. So there were a few Israelites who were not doing this work (Gersonides). Garrison cities. Rather, \u201cstore-cities.\u201d According to Gen. 47:26, Pharaoh took 20% of all the agricultural produce of Egypt. Since the Israelites lived separately and did not pay this 20%, the Egyptians demanded that they contribute by building the cities in which the produce would be stored (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 1:12
\nRASHI
\nThe more they were oppressed. However the Egyptians set their minds to oppress the Israelites, the Holy One set His mind to spread them out and increase them. So the more they were oppressed, the more they increased and spread out. A midrash adds: The Holy Spirit says, You say pen yirbeh, Lest they increase (v. 10), and I say ken yirbeh, Let them increase! Dread. Rather, the Egyptians were weary of their lives. But our Sages derive from this word va-yakutzu that the Israelites were like kotzim\u2014like thorns in the Egyptians\u2019 eyes.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe more they increased. Rather, \u201cthe more they would increase\u201d as they had before. They were in dread for their lives, as in Gen. 27:46 and Isa. 7:16.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe more they were oppressed, the more they increased. Rather, \u201ceven though they were oppressed, they increased\u201d just as they had in the days before they were oppressed. Spread out. It really means \u201cto burst forth.\u201d Under the oppression, they did not merely increase naturally, but violated the laws of nature, so remarkable was their increase. Dread. Interestingly, this Hebrew verb (\u05e7\u05d5\u05e5) and its palindrome (\u05e6\u05d5\u05e7) mean the same thing. For another example of this verb, see Isa. 7:16, \u201cthe ground whose two kings you dread shall be abandoned.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nTo dread the Israelites. When the Egyptians saw that the forced labor did the Israelites no harm, they began to fear for their lives.
\nExodus 1:13\u201315
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Pharaoh tell the midwives (v. 16) to kill the boys and let the girls live? If his purpose was to limit the population, it would have been smarter to do it the other way around, or simply to kill both boys and girls.
\nExodus 1:13
\nRASHI
\nRuthlessly. The word implies backbreaking labor.
\nRASHBAM
\nRuthlessly. Or, as OJPS translates, \u201cwith rigor.\u201d The Hebrew noun in this phrase implies backbreaking labor. The same root is used in the Talmud for \u201ccracking nuts.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Egyptians ruthlessly imposed upon the Israelites. Seeing that forcing them to labor for him was not enough to stop their increase, Pharaoh gave the Egyptians and their taskmasters permission to work them ruthlessly\u2014beyond what is ordinarily required even of slaves. When this too failed, he proceeded to give the supervisors of the midwives their instructions to kill the male children. Ruthlessly. The Aramaic translation understands this correctly as an adverb. I am surprised at the liturgical hymns that think this root can be used as a verb. That is completely wrong.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Egyptians ruthlessly imposed upon the Israelites. Since the forced labor had not harmed the Israelites, it was then decreed that all of Egypt should enslave the people. Every Egyptian who needed work done had the power to seize Israelite men to do his work.
\nExodus 1:14
\nRASHBAM
\nWith all sorts of tasks in the field. Plowing and harvesting. OJPS is closer to the Hebrew here: \u201call manner of service in the field; in all their service, wherein they made them serve\u201d in town as well, \u201cwith rigor.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nMortar and bricks. All kinds of construction work. Tasks in the field. Plowing and harvesting, pruning and trimming. OJPS correctly adds \u201cin all their service\u201d to include all the various other forms of work they did for the Egyptians, and \u201cwherein they made them serve,\u201d where the phrase \u201cthey made them serve\u201d does double duty, going both with what precedes it and with what follows it: In all their service wherein they made them serve, they made them serve \u201cwith rigor.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWith harsh labor at mortar and bricks. At first, the taskmasters supplied the bricks, and the forced laborers would construct the building. Now the whole people was driven into slavery, and they were ordered to bring earth and make the mortar with their own hands and feet, and only straw would be provided for them from the palace. They would give the bricks to the forced laborers to construct the building. Moreover, every kind of hard work that Pharaoh and the Egyptians had in the field, such as digging and clearing out manure, all this was set upon them. The Egyptians would also harry them, pressuring them so they could not rest, beating and cursing them. This is how the Egyptians ruthlessly made life bitter for them \u2026 with all sorts of tasks. The king would provide them with \u201cmeager food\u201d (Isa. 30:20), as is the custom with the king\u2019s laborers. This explains the expression used by the Israelites in Num. 11:5, \u201cWe remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons\u201d and so forth. For fish is quite plentiful in Egypt. The Israelites would get them from those who caught them at the king\u2019s order, and would get cucumbers and melons from the gardens, \u201cwith no one to molest them\u201d (Judg. 18:7). For it was the king\u2019s command. But our Sages say that they were slaves to the kings themselves, not to the subjects of the kings. If so, then the Egyptians who imposed upon them were Pharaoh\u2019s taskmasters.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThey made life bitter for them. The intent was to make them so exhausted at night that they would be unable to procreate. When this failed, they tried killing all the boys (Bekhor Shor). The more the Israelites sinned (as Ezek. 20:8 tells us), the worse their oppressors treated them (Sforno). Harsh labor. Like field work or construction work (Gersonides).
\nExodus 1:15
\nRASHI
\nShiphrah. This was Jochebed, Moses\u2019 mother; the nickname comes from how a midwife meshapheret, makes the newborn child presentable. Puah. This was Miriam, Moses\u2019 sister, so named because a midwife will po\u2019ah, whisper into the child\u2019s ear and murmur to it as women do to soothe a crying baby. But Isa. 42:14 suggests that the verb means \u201cto cry out.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Hebrew midwives. Meaning \u201cmidwives who were Hebrews\u201d rather than Egyptian women who were midwives for the Hebrews.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMidwives. They were the supervisors of all the midwives, of which there must have been more than 500. But these two supervised them to make sure Pharaoh collected his tax from their fees. I have seen the same system operative in many places. According to our tradition, the two were Jochebed and Miriam, Moses\u2019 mother and sister. And this is correct.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Hebrew midwives. They were Egyptian women who were midwives for the Hebrews; how could Pharaoh expect Hebrew women to kill Hebrew babies? (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 1:16\u201322
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How could the Hebrew midwives, who feared God and were rewarded by Him, tell the obvious lie that \u201cBefore the midwife can come to them, they have given birth\u201d (v. 19)? For if this was so, there would be no need for Hebrew midwives.
\n\u2666 What are the \u201chouses\u201d (OJPS) that God made for them (v. 21), and why is \u201cthem\u201d in the masculine gender instead of the feminine?
\n\u2666 Why is it repeated that \u201cthe midwives feared God\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why does v. 22 not specify, \u201cEvery Hebrew boy that is born you shall throw into the Nile\u201d?
\nExodus 1:16
\nRASHI
\nBirthstool. The word is the same as used for a potter\u2019s wheel in Jer. 18:3. If it is a boy. Pharaoh cared only about the males because his astrologers told him that a boy would be born who would save the Jews.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHebrew women. They are so called because of their descent from Eber; but the word only applies to those who are of the Hebrew faith. Kill him. Secretly, so that the matter does not become known. For Pharaoh knew he was committing a violent crime.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBirthstool. Rather, \u201cthe genitals\u201d (Kimhi). If it is a boy, kill him. According to v. 10, they were worried about war, in which event the males would be the dangerous ones (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 1:17
\nRASHI
\nThey let the boys live. Rather, they made them live\u2014by providing them with food.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey let the boys live. Rather, they made them live with all their might, even more than they would have done had there been no decree at all. This must be the meaning of the words, for the verse has already told us that they disobeyed the king\u2019s instructions and did not kill the boys.
\nExodus 1:18
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhy have you done this thing? He was not really asking for a reason; this was his way of saying, \u201cYou\u2019re dead for having disobeyed my command.\u201d
\nExodus 1:19
\nRASHI
\nThey are vigorous. Following the Targum, this word really means that they are \u201clife-givers\u201d\u2014the same word used for midwives. They are as skilled as the professional midwives. But our Sages read the word in its other meaning, \u201canimals\u201d\u2014implying that, like animals, the Hebrew women did not need midwives. If you are wondering how the text can compare people to animals, see the blessing of Jacob in Genesis 49, where the brothers are complimented by being compared to animals. Ezek. 19:2 extends the comparison to all the tribes by saying to the princess of Israel, \u201cWhat a lion was your mother!\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nThey are vigorous. Healthy and competent and quick to give birth.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe midwives said. We did not disobey your command; they are lively. The Hebrew women have much more vitality than do the Egyptian women.
\nExodus 1:20\u201321
\nRASHI
\nGod dealt well with the midwives. And how? He established households for them. Rather, with OJPS, \u201chouses\u201d\u2014that is, priestly, levitical, and royal dynasties, which are called \u201chouses.\u201d The priestly and levitical houses came from Jochebed, through Aaron, and the royal house came from Miriam, for David was descended from her, as explained in B. Sot. 11b.
\nExodus 1:20
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod dealt well with the midwives. By making \u201chouses\u201d for them.
\nExodus 1:21
\nRASHBAM
\nHe made them houses. Not \u201cHe,\u201d as the translations assume, but \u201che\u201d\u2014Pharaoh\u2014made houses for them to keep them from going to the Hebrew women who were giving birth. In addition, he \u201ccharged all his people\u201d (v. 22), and so forth.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe midwives feared God. And not the king. He established households for them. That is, He gave them many offspring, in recompense for having given life to the offspring of the Israelites. But Saadia explains it to mean that God literally made them houses in which He hid them so that they could not be found.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe established households for them. Rather, \u201chouses\u201d (OJPS)\u2014descendants who would be kings and leaders. And this was the appropriate reward for giving life, for the mark of a complete leader is that he provides for the welfare of those whom he leads (Gersonides).
\nExodus 1:22
\nRASHI
\nAll his people. The decree applied to the Egyptians as well as to the Israelites. The day that Moses was born, Pharaoh\u2019s astrologers told him, \u201cThe one who will save the Jews was born today. We do not know whether he is an Egyptian or an Israelite. But we can see that his end will come by means of water.\u201d So Pharaoh issued his decree that very day, against the Egyptians as well as against the Israelites. Read carefully! It does not say, \u201cevery boy that is born to the Hebrews,\u201d but \u201cevery boy that is born.\u201d What the astrologers did not understand was that the \u201cwaters\u201d through which Moses would come to harm were the waters of Meribah.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh. Everyone who sits on the throne of Egypt is called Pharaoh; our text does not give the Pharaoh\u2019s name, as do, e.g., 2 Kings 23:29\u201335 (Pharaoh Neco) and Jer. 44:30 (Pharaoh Hophra); these were their names in their own language.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nLet every girl live. Pharaoh assumed the girls would marry Egyptians and be assimilated (Gersonides).
\nExodus 2:1
\nExodus 2:1
\nRASHI
\nMarried a Levite woman. Rather, \u201ctook the daughter of Levi.\u201d He had separated from her in order not to conceive children who would then fall victim to Pharaoh\u2019s decree. Now he brought her back and \u201ctook\u201d her to wife a second time. She was even turned back into a young woman, though she was 130 at the time. For she had been born on the journey down to Egypt, just as they arrived, and the Israelites were in Egypt for 210 years. Since Moses was 80 when they left, she must have been 130 when she got pregnant with him. But she also became young again, for the text calls her \u201cdaughter\u201d of Levi.
\nRASHBAM
\nA certain man of the house of Levi. It was Amram. Married Jochebed, a Levite woman. Literally, with OJPS, \u201ca daughter of Levi\u201d; we know from Num. 26:59 that she \u201cwas born to Levi in Egypt.\u201d He married her some years before the birth of Moses. For according to 7:7, Aaron was 83 and Moses was 80 when they spoke to Pharaoh, making Aaron, their first child, three years older than his younger brother.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWent. Apparently she lived in another city. All the Israelites lived in Rameses, but there were a number of different cities there. A Levite woman. Literally, with OJPS, \u201ca daughter of Levi\u201d the son of Jacob. This is clear from Num. 26:59, where she is referred to as \u201cJochebed daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt.\u201d Thus she is the sister of Kohath. That is why 6:20, naming her husband Amram, calls her \u201chis father\u2019s sister.\u201d This demonstrates that those who say inbreeding produces defective offspring are wrong; the prohibitions against incest are not for practical reasons, but to make Israel a holy people.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA certain man of the house of Levi went. Our Sages said that he \u201cwent\u201d to get her back after taking his daughter\u2019s advice to end their separation (see below). Ibn Ezra says that the Jews lived in many different cities, and he \u201cwent\u201d from his own city to hers in order to marry her. But what point would there be for the text to mention this? In my opinion, the text is emphasizing that he ignored the danger posed by Pharaoh\u2019s decree and got married with the intention of having children. For the text uses the expression \u201cwent and did\u201d about everyone who bestirs himself to do some new action: e.g., \u201cReuben went and lay with Bilhah\u201d (Gen. 35:22); \u201che went and married Gomer\u201d (Hosea 1:1). This man too \u201cwent\u201d and married a Levite woman. The text does not mention either of their names, because if it did so it would have had to give their entire genealogies right back to Levi. But at this point, in a hurry to get to the birth of Israel\u2019s savior, the text wished to be brief. Afterward, in 6:14\u201325, the text will give the complete genealogy of Reuben and Simeon in order to get down to Levi and to the parents of Moses. According to the straightforward meaning, this verse refers not to a reunion after a separation but to their actual marriage; the events in the Torah are not narrated in strict chronological order. For they were married, and she bore Miriam and Aaron, before Pharaoh\u2019s decree. After the decree that every boy who was born should be cast into the Nile, she bore this \u201cbeautiful\u201d (v. 2) son. The text does not describe the births of Miriam and Aaron, because there was nothing unusual about them. According to our Sages, this was a remarriage, for the man had separated from his wife in order not to father a child who would be killed by Pharaoh\u2019s decree and brought her back after Miriam prophesied that her mother would bear a son who would save Israel. In this case, \u201cmarried\u201d implies that they celebrated the reunion as if it were a marriage: He brought her back to his home in a bridal palanquin, with Miriam and Aaron dancing joyfully before them, for by this means Israel would be redeemed. Even though Aaron was still too young to understand this, God put joy in his heart about it. Or perhaps his sister Miriam told him to rejoice.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA Levite woman. The tradition quoted by Rashi says that Jochebed was 130 when Moses was born. My own calculations, according to the rabbinic assumption that she was born just as the sons of Jacob entered Egypt, make her 145. In either case, this would be a greater miracle than happened to Sarah; one would think the Torah would have mentioned it. But the whole assumption is the height of absurdity. If she was born at the end of Levi\u2019s life, long after he arrived in Egypt, she would have been 58 at Moses\u2019 birth, which is a good deal less strange (Gersonides).
\nExodus 2:2\u20134
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Moses\u2019 mother put him in the Nile (v. 3)? Wasn\u2019t this exactly what Pharaoh had decreed? Didn\u2019t she realize how easily the ark might have overturned, or that Moses might be found by someone who would carry out Pharaoh\u2019s decree?
\nExodus 2:2\u20134
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhen she saw how beautiful he was, she hid him. It is well known that women love their children, beautiful or not, and they would all hide them to the best of their ability; there was no need to say that he was beautiful to explain why she hid him. The reason why this detail was included is that she saw in him an unprecedented beauty and thought that a miracle might be done for him, and he would be saved. So she set her mind to devise a plan. When she saw that she could hide him no longer, she thought he might be rescued by some other scheme and made a wicker basket for him. His sister stationed herself at a distance so as not to be recognized, to learn what would befall him. All this supports the words of our Sages, who explained that the radiant beauty of the baby Moses filled the whole house with light and that Miriam had prophesied, \u201cMy mother is going to bear a son who will save Israel.\u201d
\nExodus 2:2
\nRASHI
\nHow beautiful he was. When he was born, the whole house filled with light.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe woman conceived at the time of Pharaoh\u2019s decree about casting the boys into the Nile and bore a son; and when she saw how beautiful he was, she hid him. One who explains this to mean that she hid him because she saw he was beautiful is a liar. For the mothers of all newborns have maternal instincts toward them. So \u201csaw\u201d must be explained as we explained it in Gen. 1:31, \u201cGod saw all that He had made, and found it very good.\u201d He looked at all He had made and at all the actions He had performed to see whether any of them needed repair. It turned out that everything was fine and in good repair. The same applies here. Moses was presumably born at the end of six months\u2014just as Samuel was born \u201cafter the seasons of the days\u201d (1 Sam. 1:20), implying two seasons of three months each, plus two days. This would explain why she was able to hide him for three months. For the Egyptians would check up on all the pregnant women at the end of nine months. So when Moses was born, she looked to see whether he was a stillbirth, in which case she need not bother to hide him, and saw that he was good and fine. For he had hair and nails, which are signs of viability according to B. Yev. 80b. So she knew that he would live, and she hid him for three months, until the end of the nine months that are the normal period of gestation. And when they came to check on her, she told them she had miscarried. For otherwise they would have thrown him into the Nile.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe woman conceived. We know that Aaron was older than Moses. This passage does not mention him because nothing happened to him in his youth, as it did to Moses. A similar phenomenon is found in 2 Sam. 12:24, where Solomon appears to be David\u2019s first living child; yet, according to 2 Sam. 5:14, Shammua, Shobab, and Nathan had already been born to him. Miriam, too, was older; our ancestral tradition identifies her with Puah, the midwife, and v. 4 says explicitly that Moses\u2019 sister stationed herself to watch over him. Ben Zuta reads Num. 26:59, \u201cshe bore \u2026 Aaron and Moses and their sister Miriam,\u201d as implying that Miriam was the youngest; but this blind man has forgotten the many biblical examples showing that word order has nothing to do with chronology. How beautiful he was. Literally, not \u201cbeautiful\u201d but \u201cgood.\u201d In reference to a grown man, \u201cgood\u201d can refer to intellectual or spiritual qualities; but with reference to a baby, it can only refer to physical ones. Three months. Some say this implies he was born at the beginning of the seventh month of her pregnancy, when the Egyptians expected her to still be pregnant for another three months. But this is a midrash\u2014the Egyptians had no way of knowing when a woman got pregnant. The text is merely telling us how long she was able to hide him. It is extremely farfetched to think that a child born at six months could survive. Everyone knows that the standard length of pregnancy is nine months, so much so that the date of conception can be figured by subtracting nine months from the date of birth. I have done this five times myself.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nShe hid him for three months. The Egyptians did not realize she was pregnant for three months, at which point they began to count nine months (Bekhor Shor). Since Moses was born on the 7th of Adar, he was hidden until the 6th of Sivan\u2014the same day the Torah would later be given (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 2:3
\nRASHI
\nShe could hide him no longer. For the Egyptians had been calculating the days since her husband brought her back. She actually gave birth to Moses after six months and a day, which is quite possible, for B. Nid. 38b tells us that \u201ca woman who bears at seven months may give birth before the full number of months has been completed.\u201d The Egyptians finally came around to check up on her at the end of the ninth month. Wicker. It is strong and pliable. Bitumen and pitch. Not \u201cbitumen,\u201d but \u201cmortar.\u201d Unlike Noah\u2019s ark, which was caulked with pitch inside and out, Moses\u2019 was caulked with clay inside and pitch only on the outside, so that the righteous child should not have to smell the pitch.
\nRASHBAM
\nHide him. Note that the unusual pointing means this word should be pronounced ha-tz\u2019-fi-no. With bitumen on the inside and pitch on the outside, to make it watertight. Among the reeds in the water by the bank of the Nile. She hid it well, so that passersby along the bank of the Nile could not see the basket. But those who actually bathed in the river could see it, for Jochebed did not go into the river to make sure it was hidden on every side. That is how Pharaoh\u2019s daughter, who was bathing in the river, saw it. But her maidens, who were walking along the bank of the Nile (v. 5), were unable to see it.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhen she could hide him no longer. The text does not tell us why, but perhaps the Egyptian neighbor women heard his voice. We know from 3:22 that there were Egyptians living among them even in Goshen. Bitumen. Etymologically related to the word translated \u201ccaulked\u201d; as used here, it refers to a sticky red clay found in the land of Israel. Arabic has the same word. She put the child into it. She thought, like Hagar, \u201cLet me not look on as the child dies\u201d (Gen. 21:16). Or perhaps Miriam had prophetically told her to do so. God\u2019s designs are subtle indeed; it may well be that He arranged the whole affair so as to have Moses grow up in the palace, at a high intellectual level, rather than in the debased environment of a slave. Moreover, his kinsmen would not have respected him when it was time for him to lead them out of slavery if he had grown up among them. Reeds. The Hebrew word is the name of a plant found in a riverine environment.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhen she could hide him no longer. A three-month-old cries much more loudly than a newborn (Gersonides). Wicker. Wicker is a reed; so the basket would not be noticed when she placed it in the reeds (Bekhor Shor). Among the reeds by the bank of the Nile. Sugarcane is grown on the banks of the Nile, and this is where she placed the basket\u2014not in the river (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 2:4
\nIBN EZRA
\nHis sister. This may merely mean a female relation of some kind.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHis sister. She must have been about 15, but her age is nowhere mentioned (Abarbanel). Stationed herself. Literally, \u201cshe [her mother] stationed her\u201d (Bekhor Shor). To learn what would befall him. She assumed some Egyptian would take him in; the Egyptians were so promiscuous that many illegitimate children must have been abandoned (Sforno).
\nExodus 2:5\u20136
\nExodus 2:5
\nRASHI
\nHer maidens walked along the Nile. Literally, \u201cwere going, the Nile at hand.\u201d The idiom comes from the closeness of a man\u2019s hand to his body. But our Sages say \u201cgoing\u201d means they were \u201cgoing\u201d to die (as in Gen. 25:32, where Esau says, \u201cI am going to die\u201d), because they tried to prevent her from taking Moses out of the water. The text gives them some support, for why do we need to be told that her maidens were going with her? Her slave girl. The Sages read amatah in its other meaning, \u201cher forearm\u201d (though grammatically this would require a double m), the same word that in the plural means \u201ccubits.\u201d They take it to mean that her arm lengthened as many cubits as it took to reach the basket.
\nRASHBAM
\nHer slave girl. Not \u201cher forearm.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe daughter of Pharaoh came down. \u201cDown\u201d because water is always at a lower level; and of course Pharaoh\u2019s daughter came down from the palace. To bathe. This was the custom of the Egyptian ladies. Her maidens. That is, her maidservants, who attended her. She \u2026 sent her slave girl. One of the maidens. Grammatically, amah cannot possibly mean \u201cher arm,\u201d as the midrash has it. In any case, the amah that means \u201ccubit\u201d is a unit of measure\u2014it does not mean \u201cforearm.\u201d Moreover, why would the text have bothered to mention her maidens if she got the baby herself? In any case, the basket was placed quite far from shore\u2014certainly more than an arm\u2019s length\u2014to keep it from being visible to any passerby; and a Pharaoh\u2019s daughter would not plunge into the reeds in this way.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nCame down to bathe in the Nile. Literally, \u201con\u201d the Nile. It may be that there were terraces in the Nile, and she came down from the palace to bathe on the first terrace. So she did not enter the actual current of the Nile, but saw the ark in the reeds at a distance from her and sent her slave girl to fetch it. Or \u201con the Nile\u201d is simply idiomatic for \u201cin\u201d the Nile, as the translations take it.
\nExodus 2:6
\nRASHI
\nWhen she opened it, she saw that it was a child. That is the straightforward meaning. But the verse can also be read to say, \u201cShe saw it with the child,\u201d which can be interpreted midrashically as follows: What did she see with the child? The Shekhinah. A boy crying. He already had the voice of a boy, not a baby.
\nRASHBAM
\nWhen she opened it, she saw that it was a child. This translation is mistaken. Who doesn\u2019t know that if she opened the basket she would see it was a child? What it means is that she opened the basket and looked at the child to see whether it was male or female, and saw that it was a boy, that is, that it was male and not female. She saw that his penis was circumcised and realized that it was not an abandoned baby\u2014as she might have thought had it been a girl\u2014but had been deliberately hidden. Note that in the story of Samson we find the expression, \u201chow to act with the boy that is to be born\u201d (Judg. 13:8)\u2014it is called a \u201cboy\u201d on the very day that it is born. A boy crying. She took pity on it. She took pity on it because it was crying. And because she saw that it was a circumcised boy, she said, This must be a Hebrew child.
\nIBN EZRA
\nShe saw that it was a child. Literally, as in OJPS, \u201cshe saw it\u2014the child.\u201d A boy crying. His limbs were formed as if he were already a full-grown boy. She saw that he was circumcised and, because of his beauty, she took pity on him; this is why v. 2 makes such a point of his being beautiful.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA boy crying. Rashi explains that he had the voice of a boy, not a baby. But R. Nehemiah in B. Sotah 12b has already refuted this explanation: \u201cIf so, you have made our master Moses into one possessed of a blemish.\u201d Moreover, why would the text mention the depth of his voice? Ibn Ezra thinks that his limbs were shaped like those of a boy rather than those of an infant and that this was to add to the description of his beauty, which is what made Pharaoh\u2019s daughter save him. But it would be more correct to explain it that he was crying as powerfully as a boy and that this is why she took pity on him. The legend is that even as a baby he was acting like a grown boy\u2014until the angel Gabriel came and hit him to make him cry and arouse pity in Pharaoh\u2019s daughter. But in my opinion there is no need for all this. A baby can be called a boy from the very day of his birth, as when Samson\u2019s father asks for instructions about \u201chow to act with the boy that is to be born\u201d (Judg. 13:8). Similarly, Samuel is called a \u201cboy\u201d when Hannah brings him to Shiloh, though he cannot be older than 24 months, for he has just been weaned off milk (1 Sam. 1:23\u201324). This must be a Hebrew child. She realized he must have been put there either in order to save him or so as not to \u201clook on as the child dies\u201d (Gen. 37:22). And why would an Egyptian need to do this? Some say that she could tell he was a Hebrew because she saw that he was circumcised. But in order to know this she would have had to take off his clothes and check him. And there is no need for this explanation.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA Hebrew child. Who had been cast into the Nile (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 2:7\u201311
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How did Pharaoh\u2019s daughter imagine she could bring Moses up in the palace (v. 10), and how could Pharaoh\u2019s advisers not notice this?
\n\u2666 If Moses grew up as the son of Pharaoh\u2019s daughter, how did he know that the Israelites were his kinsfolk (v. 11)?
\n\u2666 Why did Moses leave the palace to associate with the pitiable Jews, when any one of them would have disassociated himself from them if he could?
\nExodus 2:7
\nRASHI
\nA Hebrew nurse. For she had taken him to a number of Egyptian nurses, but he would not suck from them with the mouth that would one day speak with the Shekhinah.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA Hebrew nurse. For an Egyptian nurse would not be willing to suckle a Hebrew child (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 2:8
\nRASHI
\nThe girl went. She went with alacrity. The text uses the unusual word almah for \u201cgirl\u201d to suggest alimut, \u201cvigor.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe child\u2019s mother. The milk of his own mother is better for a child than that of any other (Gersonides).
\nExodus 2:9
\nRASHI
\nTake this child. When Pharaoh\u2019s daughter told Jochebed, \u201cTake,\u201d Heilichi, she had no idea that she was speaking prophetically: Hei lichi: \u201cHe is yours.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nTake this child. Saadia reads \u201ctake,\u201d heilichi, as hei lichi, \u201che is yours.\u201d But this is incorrect; we find no such expression anywhere in the Bible. Compare it to \u201cnurse it,\u201d which is grammatically similar.
\nExodus 2:10
\nRASHI
\nI drew him out. Hebrew m\u2019shitihu. The Targum explains this word correctly. Menahem derives the name from \u05de\u05d5\u05e9, but I say the correct root is \u05de\u05e9\u05d4, \u201cto take out\u201d (as in 2 Sam. 22:17 and Ps. 18:17, \u201cHe drew me out of the mighty waters\u201d). To be from \u05de\u05d5\u05e9, it would have to be mashti, not mashiti.
\nRASHBAM
\nI drew him out. Hebrew m\u2019shitihu. The verb \u05de\u05e9\u05d4 is a variant of \u05de\u05e9\u05da \u201cto pull\u201d with the particular meaning of \u201cpull out of the water\u201d; see also Ps. 18:17, \u201cHe drew me out of the mighty waters.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nMade him her son. That is, adopted him, as Naomi does to Obed in Ruth 4. Moses is the Hebrew translation of his Egyptian name, which was Monius. The Talmud (B. Meg. 13a) reads 1 Chron. 4:18 to say that Moses had six other names, and Leviticus Rabbah adds three more. Which is surprising, since names are contingent on accidental factors and not part of the essence of what they name, as I will explain shortly in connection with \u201cWhen they ask me, \u2018What is His name?\u2019 \u201d (3:16). How could 1 Chron. 4:18 say \u201cThese were the sons of Bithiah daughter of Pharaoh\u201d if all the names referred to a single person? When a single person has two names, the text states this clearly: \u201cEsau\u2014that is, Edom\u201d (Gen. 36:1); \u201cAbram, that is, Abraham\u201d (1 Chron. 1:27). Otherwise one would presume that two different names referred to two separate people. There are innumerable cases where two biblical names are identified midrashically as being the same person, but the bottom line is what the ge\u2019onim say: There is no need to reconcile contradictions with, or within, the midrash. Explaining. Perhaps she learned our language, or asked someone.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nShe named him Moses. Either she had converted to Judaism and learned Hebrew, as our rabbis suggest, or Jochebed named him and explained the name to her (Hizkuni). The grammatical form has been misunderstood. The verse means: She (Jochebed) named him Moses, explaining to Pharaoh\u2019s daughter, \u201cYou drew him out of the water\u201d (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 2:11
\nRASHI
\nWhen Moses had grown. V. 10 already says \u201cwhen the child grew up\u201d; the verbs are exactly the same in the Hebrew. R. Judah says: V. 10 means that he attained his full growth; v. 11 means that he had grown in power, for Pharaoh put him in charge of his household. Witnessed their labors. Literally, \u201che saw in their labors\u201d\u2014he saw himself in their labors, empathized with them, and grieved for them. An Egyptian. He was one of the taskmasters appointed to oversee the Israelite foremen, and he would get them up for work at cockcrow. Beating a Hebrew. Whipping him cruelly. It was the husband of Shelomith daughter of Dibri. The taskmaster wanted her. At night he had roused the husband for work and gotten him out of the house, then returned and had sex with the man\u2019s wife, who thought it was her husband. When the man came home, he realized what had happened. When the Egyptian saw that the man had found out, he beat him cruelly all day long.
\nRASHBAM
\nBeating a Hebrew. Except for the archaism, OJPS \u201csmiting\u201d is a more accurate translation, since the same Hebrew word may mean either \u201ckill\u201d or \u201cbeat\u201d; but NJPS may well be correct.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe went out of the palace to his kinsfolk. The Egyptians.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhen Moses had grown up, he went out to his kinsfolk. That is, when he had grown to be a man. The \u201cgrowing up\u201d in v. 10 merely implies that he had grown too old to nurse, so his mother brought him to Pharaoh\u2019s daughter and she adopted him, so he might \u201cattend upon kings\u201d (Prov. 22:29). Afterward he grew to the age of maturity. He went out to his kinsfolk. He had been told that he was a Jew, and he wanted to see them because they were his kinsfolk. But when he saw their toilsome labors, he could not bear it, so he killed the Egyptian who was beating the oppressed Jew.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe went out to his kinsfolk. Either it was well known in the palace that Moses was a Hebrew, or else Pharaoh\u2019s daughter told him (Gersonides).
\nExodus 2:12\u201315
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since Moses killed the Egyptian in front of the man who was being beaten (vv. 11\u201312), why was he so surprised (v. 14) to find out that \u201cthe matter was known\u201d?
\nExodus 2:12
\nRASHI
\nHe turned this way and that. That is, Moses \u201cturned this way\u201d and saw what the taskmaster had done to the man at home, and \u201cturned that way\u201d and saw what he had done to him in the field. But contextually it means that he looked around. Seeing no one about. Read with OJPS, \u201cWhen he saw that there was no man\u201d among the potential descendants of the Egyptian who would convert to Judaism.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThose who say that he struck down the Egyptian by means of the Tetragrammaton are incorrect, as I shall explain. He struck him with a stone or with a spear.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe struck down the Egyptian. Who had earned death according to the Noahide commandments by committing adultery with the Hebrew\u2019s wife; see Rashi\u2019s comment (Hizkuni). The sand. Which was there for use in the construction (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 2:13
\nRASHI
\nTwo Hebrews. Dathan and Abiram, the same two who would later leave some of the manna over until morning (16:20). Fighting. That is, arguing. Why do you strike your fellow? Literally, \u201cwhy will you strike your fellow?\u201d Though he had not struck him yet, Moses knew that the one who raised his fist against the other was the offender. Your fellow in wickedness.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe offender. The one of the two who was doing violence to the other.
\nExodus 2:14
\nRASHI
\nWho made you chief and ruler over us? Literally, \u201cWho made you a man to be chief and ruler over us?\u201d Who made you a man? You are still just a boy! Do you mean to kill me? Literally, \u201cDo you say to kill me?\u201d From this we learn that he killed the Egyptian by speech\u2014by pronouncing the Tetragrammaton. Moses was frightened. The contextual meaning is straightforward. Midrashically, having found that there were some among the Israelites wicked enough to reveal what he had done, he was frightened that they would no longer deserve redemption. Then the matter is known! Again, this is straightforward contextually. Midrashically, it means: Now the matter I was puzzled about\u2014what was the sin of the Israelites that they, of all the 70 nations, should be subjected to such harsh toil?\u2014\u201cis known\u201d to me. For I see that they deserve it.
\nRASHBAM
\nDo you mean to kill me because I am beating my coworker as you killed the Egyptian because he was beating a Hebrew? Then the matter is known! Better, \u201cso,\u201d in such a way, the matter is known\u2014not as I thought when I hid him in the sand, that it would not be known, but it is so\u2014it is known.
\nIBN EZRA
\nDo you mean to kill me? Literally, \u201cAre you saying to kill me?\u201d; but (as NJPS recognizes) \u201csay\u201d often has the meaning of \u201cthink\u201d or \u201cintend,\u201d as in the expression \u201cI said in my heart\u201d (Eccles. 2:1). Then. Indeed. But some say it means \u201cif so.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nDo you mean to kill me? Literally, \u201cDo you say to kill me?\u201d Rashi says that Moses killed the Egyptian by means of the Tetragrammaton; this is a rabbinic midrash. If that were how it happened, I wonder who told the offending Hebrew that Moses had killed the Egyptian? Perhaps Moses put his hand on him and cursed him in the name of the Lord, and this explains \u201che struck\u201d (v. 12). Or perhaps when the Egyptian fell dead before him, Moses feared that they would accuse him, so he buried him in the sand. But the Hebrew saw him doing it and knew that Moses had caused the death, or perhaps, having seen only the burial, he thought Moses had physically slain him. NJPS follows Ibn Ezra\u2019s suggestion here. But there is no need for this explanation. What the offender said was this: \u201cWho made you chief and ruler over us? Do you say \u2018Why do you strike your fellow?\u2019 (v. 13) because you wish to kill me as you killed the Egyptian?\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nChief and ruler. To kill me without due process of law (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 2:15
\nRASHI
\nPharaoh learned of the matter. Because Dathan and Abiram told him. He sought to kill Moses. He handed him over to the executioner, but the sword had no power over him, as we know from Moses\u2019 saying in 18:4, \u201cHe delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh.\u201d Sat down beside a well. He had learned from the example of Jacob that this was a good way to meet one\u2019s mate.
\nRASHBAM
\nHe arrived in the land of Midian, and sat down beside a well. The translation is misleading; the same verb is used in both instances. The text tells us in general terms that he \u201csettled\u201d in Midian, and then elaborates: he \u201csettled\u201d down by a well when he first rested, like a man who stops to take a breather.
\nIBN EZRA
\nBeside a well. Literally, \u201cbeside the well\u201d\u2014the famous well. Or it could be that it was the only well there. Since Midian was within the Egyptian sphere of influence, Moses was forced to become a shepherd, avoiding urban areas where he might be recognized. Only when God told him that those he had been fleeing were dead did he feel safe.
\nExodus 2:16\u201320
\nExodus 2:16
\nRASHI
\nThe priest of Midian. That is, their chief. But he had abandoned idolatry, and they had excommunicated him. The troughs. These were made directly in the ground.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe priest of Midian. This is Jethro, not Reuel (see v. 18). \u201cPriest\u201d in Biblical Hebrew can refer to one who serves any god, false or true. But Jethro was indeed a priest of the true God, as I shall explain in my comment to 19:6.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe priest of Midian had seven daughters. The text does not mention his name, but it is clear from the phrase that describes him that he was the most honored of that priesthood\u2014and that it was Jethro. For after Moses becomes his son-in-law the text writes, \u201cMoses went back to his father-in-law Jether \u2026 and Jethro said to Moses, \u2018Go in peace\u2019 \u201d (4:18). They are two versions of the same name. Similarly we find Elijah sometimes spelled in the Hebrew text \u201cElijahu\u201d and Jeremiah \u201cJeremiahu.\u201d But after Jethro converted to Judaism he was called Hobab, as we know from Judg. 4:11, \u201cHobab, father-in-law of Moses.\u201d For it is the way of converts to call themselves by a different name when they become Jews. His father\u2019s name was Reuel, as we know from Num. 10:29, where he is called \u201cHobab son of Reuel the Midianite.\u201d When it says in our own text \u201cWhen they returned to their father Reuel\u201d (v. 18), it really means their grandfather. Similarly Jacob in Gen. 32:10 says, \u201cGod of my father Abraham,\u201d though Abraham was really his grandfather. There are many such occurrences in the Bible. In this particular case, the daughters are described as returning to their grandfather because their father was detained at the temple with his priestly duties. But when it says \u201cMoses consented to stay with the man\u201d (v. 21), \u201cthe man\u201d might refer to Jethro, since it was he who gave him Zipporah, his daughter. They came \u2026 and filled the troughs. Because the shepherds would come every day and fill the troughs and water their sheep first, and afterward these women would water theirs. On this particular day it happened that the women got there first. They filled the troughs thinking they could water their sheep before the shepherds got there. But the shepherds arrived and drove them away so that they could water their sheep first, as they did every day. But Moses was angry at such violence and helped the women. For since they had filled the troughs, the water was theirs. He \u201ceven drew water\u201d for them (v. 19), for the water in the troughs was not enough for their sheep.
\nExodus 2:17
\nRASHI
\nDrove them off. They could never have done this to the daughters of such an important man if he had not been excommunicated.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses rose to their defense. But this time, since neither of the parties was Israelite, he did not try to punish or reprove the offenders (Sforno). This story is juxtaposed to those of vv. 11\u201314 (even though it took place long afterward) to demonstrate that Moses was just, honest, and bighearted\u2014the very qualities that prepare one for true prophecy (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 2:18
\nRASHI
\nReuel. Some think Reuel was Jethro\u2019s father, and \u201cfather\u201d here means \u201cancestor\u201d; see my comment to 4:18.
\nRASHBAM
\nTheir father Reuel. Their father\u2019s father. In which case their father\u2019s name was Jethro, the same person as \u201cHobab son of Reuel\u201d who is mentioned in Num. 10:29. But if Reuel was really their father, the same person as Jethro, then Hobab was Jethro\u2019s son. But Judg. 4:11, \u201cHobab, father-in-law of Moses,\u201d proves that Hobab is Jethro. For everywhere else that it mentions \u201cfather-in-law of Moses\u201d it mentions Jethro.
\nIBN EZRA
\nTheir father Reuel. He was really their grandfather. For their father was Hobab (also known as Jethro). This is shown by the reference in Judg. 4:11 to \u201cHobab, father-in-law of Moses,\u201d and in Num. 10:29 to Hobab as \u201cson of Reuel the Midianite.\u201d
\nExodus 2:19
\nIBN EZRA
\nDrew water for us. Since v. 16 says that they themselves drew water, this is either the girls\u2019 way of saying that Moses \u201cwatered their flock\u201d (v. 17), or an indication that the water they themselves drew was not enough, and Moses indeed had to draw more for them.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAn Egyptian rescued us from the shepherds who drive us away from the troughs every day, though we are there first.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAn Egyptian. They could tell by his clothing and his language (Bekhor Shor). Possibly, or perhaps they had asked him (Gersonides).
\nExodus 2:20
\nRASHI
\nWhy did you leave the man? He recognized him for a descendant of Jacob, because the water in the well rose up to meet him. To break bread. \u201cCast your bread upon the waters\u201d (Eccles. 11:1)\u2014perhaps he will marry one of you! And see my comment to \u201cNothing save the bread that he ate\u201d (Gen. 39:6).
\nIBN EZRA
\nHis daughters. Just as one\u2019s grandfather may be called \u201cfather\u201d (as when Jacob says, \u201cO God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac,\u201d Gen. 32:10), granddaughters may be called \u201cdaughters.\u201d Ask him in. The text does not go on to say that they did ask him in, because this is obvious in any case.
\nExodus 2:21\u201323
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Moses name his first son Gershom? According to the explanations of the names in Exod. 18:1\u20134, Eliezer (\u201cGod was my help\u201d) should have been first, and only after God helped him could he escape to Midian and call himself \u201ca stranger in a foreign land\u201d (v. 22), which should have inspired the name of his second son.
\n\u2666 Why do the Israelites begin to groan about their bondage only after the death of the king of Egypt?
\nExodus 2:21
\nRASHI
\nMoses consented. The Targum indicates that this is the correct translation. Midrashically, it is to be interpreted not from \u05d9\u05d0\u05dc, but from \u05d0\u05dc\u05d4, \u201cswear\u201d\u2014he swore to him that he would not budge from Midian without his consent.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe man \u2026 gave Moses his daughter Zipporah as wife. The verse seems to imply that it was Reuel, their grandfather, who did this; but perhaps Jethro was not there.
\nExodus 2:22
\nRASHBAM
\nIn a foreign land. For this is the meaning of Gershom\u2014ger sham, \u201ca stranger there\u201d in a distant land.
\nIBN EZRA
\nShe bore him a son. It was Zipporah who was Moses\u2019 \u201cCushite\u201d wife (Num. 12:1); do not believe the legend in The Chronicles of Moses that he was King of Cush (Ethiopia) for 40 years and had a queen there. In general, no work that was not written either by prophets or by sages relying on tradition is to be relied on, all the more so when it contains matters that defy reason. I am referring to such works as The Book of Zerubbabel, Eldad the Danite\u2019s book, and the like. Whom he named. Whom Moses named.
\nExodus 2:23
\nRASHI
\nThe king of Egypt died. He did not literally die; the Israelites would have rejoiced, not groaned, at his death. He was struck with leprosy, which is a kind of living death, and would slaughter Israelite children and bathe in their blood.
\nRASHBAM
\nA long time after that. After Moses had killed the Egyptian and Pharaoh king of Egypt sought to kill him, and he fled, a long time had passed, until now he was 80 years old when the Holy One spoke with him. And now the king who had been seeking to kill him died. The Israelites had been groaning all this time, and the Holy One saw their affliction. At this point, Moses was \u201ctending the flock\u201d (3:1) and the Holy One appeared to him and commanded him to return to Egypt. Moses was afraid to do this until the Holy One informed him, \u201cAll the men who sought to kill you are dead\u201d (4:19). It was Pharaoh who died. That is why our text says, The king of Egypt died\u2014to set the stage for God\u2019s remark in 4:19. Similarly Ham is called father of Canaan in Gen. 9:18 to set the stage for the curse of Canaan at the end of that chapter.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe king of Egypt died. It was now safe for Moses to return to Egypt. Moreover, the Israelites had now repented of the idol worship that (according to Ezek. 20:5\u20137) they had practiced in Egypt. The Israelites were groaning. The fact that the Israelites could groan after the death of such a murderous king is an indication that the new king was even worse. I shall explain the implications of this verse further at 4:19.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA long time after that. Literally, \u201cduring those many days.\u201d One would expect it to say \u201cafter those many days.\u201d Our Sages explain that the text calls them \u201cmany,\u201d because it was a painful time that seemed interminable. In any case, the period in which the king of Egypt died and the Israelites cried out to God was actually quite short. We might rather explain \u201cthose many days\u201d to refer to the whole period of slavery and oppression, which was long indeed. For the exile went on for a long time, and it was this that made the Israelites cry out. But in my opinion, the \u201cmany days\u201d are the period in which Moses was on the run from Pharaoh. For in reality it was in his youth that he fled. He \u201cwent out to his kinsfolk\u201d as soon as he was grown up, killed the Egyptian that very day, and fled the next day when it was reported. He must have been about 12 years old, as our Sages point out; he certainly could not have reached 20. And when he stood before Pharaoh, he was 80. So he must have been on the run for more than 60 years. It seems likely that he did not reach Midian and marry Zipporah until near the end of this period, for at this point in the story only one of their two children had been born. But nothing that needed telling occurred until this point. One who is on the run from the authorities does not linger in any one city, but flees in disguise \u201cfrom nation to nation, from one kingdom to another\u201d (Ps. 105:13). At the end of this time, he came to Midian and stayed there (v. 15). One would have expected that verse to say \u201che arrived in the land of Midian,\u201d as in the NJPS translation, but it really says \u201che settled in the land of Midian,\u201d hinting that he had not settled in a city until he came to Midian at last and did so. As the text is written, it looks as if the whole sequence of events took place one after the other, within a single year, so this expression about \u201cmany days\u201d serves to remind us that this is a brief description of quite a long period of time. Had it said \u201cafter many days,\u201d that would have meant \u201cmany days after Moses settled in Midian,\u201d which is not what the text wished to convey. The king of Egypt died. The Israelites were groaning. According to Rashi, he became leprous and would slaughter Jewish children and bathe in their blood. This is a midrash. The straightforward sense of the text is that all who are enslaved to an evil master look forward hopefully to the day of his death, but in this case they saw that the new king was more wicked than the first and, saying \u201cOur bones are dried up, our hope is gone; we are doomed\u201d (Ezek. 37:11), they \u201cgroaned with the groans of one struck down\u201d (Ezek. 30:24).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA long time. A difficult time always seems long, a happy one short (Hizkuni). The Israelites were groaning. Since the evil decrees did not end with the death of the Pharaoh who had issued them, they foresaw no end to their suffering (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 2:24\u20133:2
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since God heard the Israelites\u2019 moaning, what further need is there to say afterward (v. 25) that \u201cGod looked upon the Israelites, and God took notice of them\u201d?
\n\u2666 Since this was Moses\u2019 first prophetic experience, when \u201can angel of the Lord\u201d appeared to him (v. 2), why was he surprised at the bush not burning up, rather than at this more marvelous sight?
\nExodus 2:24
\nRASHBAM
\nGod remembered His covenant. He remembered that He had promised the three Patriarchs that he would give them the land of Canaan. Now the end of the 400-year period that he had mentioned to Abraham in Gen. 15:13 was drawing near.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod remembered. That is, He remembered that the preordained period of Israelite slavery (Gen. 15:13) was about to come to an end.
\nExodus 2:25
\nRASHI
\nGod took notice of them. He turned His attention to them and did not hide His eyes from them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod looked upon the Israelites, and God took notice of them. More literally, \u201cGod saw \u2026 and God knew.\u201d According to the philosophers, there are two kinds of knowledge: knowledge of what is existent, and knowledge of what exists only potentially. According to this view, God saw what had already been done to the Israelites, and God knew what was going to happen to them in the future. But the most plausible explanation of this verse is that the text is speaking about God in human terms. Similarly, 3:7 says, \u201cI have heard their cry \u2026 I know their pains.\u201d But some interpret our verse to mean that God saw the slave labor that the Egyptians made them perform in public, and God knew their oppression of them in secret.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nGod looked upon the Israelites and God took notice of them. Rashi\u2019s explanation is to be preferred to that of Ibn Ezra here. For at first God did hide His face from them, and they were \u201cready prey\u201d (Deut. 31:17). Now God \u201clooked upon them,\u201d which is to say that He no longer hid His face from them, but knew their pain and all that was being done to them and all that they needed. The text goes to great lengths to mention all the reasons why God should redeem them (see also 3:7), for despite the fact that the time decreed for their Egyptian slavery had expired, they were idolaters and unworthy of redemption, as is explained in Ezek. 20:5\u201310. But because of their crying out to Him, He mercifully accepted their prayer. But the True meaning of the text contains a great secret, one of the deep mysteries of the Torah: that their affliction rose up to the Light of His Countenance and He brought them near to Knowledge, as in \u201cOh, make them known in these years! Though angry, may You remember compassion\u201d (Hab. 3:2). That is why the text goes on about this even after having said in v. 24 that God heard them and remembered His covenant. This verse is explained in Sefer ha-Bahir; you can understand it from there.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGod took notice of them. That is, God\u2019s providence cleaved to them, to get them out of Egypt before the scheduled time of redemption, because of His covenant with the Patriarchs. For divine providence continues after the good man into subsequent generations as long as his offspring preserve it (Gersonides).
\nExodus 3:1
\nRASHI
\nInto the wilderness. So as not to steal by grazing the flock in pastures owned by others. The mountain of God. Moses was able to say this later, when he wrote the Torah; he did not know it at the time.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHis father-in-law Jethro. In my opinion, Jethro is Zipporah\u2019s brother; see my comment to Num. 10:29. Horeb. Mount Sinai; see Deuteronomy, where this is the standard name for Sinai. It is also found in Mal. 3:22. Etymologically, Horeb refers to the extreme dryness (horeb) of the location (for it is far from the Nile and so hot that no rain falls), and Sinai to the bush (sneh). The mountain of God. Moses knew this only later, when he wrote down the Torah.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHis father-in-law Jethro the priest of Midian. When one is reduced in circumstances, it is better to be beholden to a great man than to a small one, and to a relative rather than to a stranger (Abarbanel). Into the wilderness. Rather, \u201cbeyond the wilderness,\u201d for in the wilderness there is no forage (Bekhor Shor). Came to Horeb. By himself, to be alone for purposes of prayer and reflection (Sforno). The mountain of God. So called because it was a place predisposed to have the divine emanation attach itself to Moses there. Alternatively, Moses might already have received prophecy there; or it may simply have meant \u201ca God-almighty big mountain\u201d (Gersonides).
\nExodus 3:2
\nRASHI
\nIn a blazing fire. Literally, \u201cin the heart of the fire.\u201d Out of a bush. And not out of some lofty tree, in accordance with God\u2019s assurance, \u201cI will be with him in distress\u201d (Ps. 91:15). While My people are enslaved, I, too, am in cramped quarters.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe bush was not consumed. Even at the very point where the flame came forth from the bush there was not a trace of burning.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIn a blazing fire. Rather, \u201cin the heart of the fire.\u201d Following the standard interpretation, NJPS translates as if a \u05d4 has dropped out of the word, and labbah is simply lahabah (\u201cflame\u201d). But this cannot be. For \u05d4 is never a vowel letter except at the end of a word, and it cannot simply \u201cdrop out\u201d of the middle of a word. What I think is that it is a form of the word \u201cheart.\u201d There is a comparable form, libbah, in Ezek. 16:30. Out of a bush. Most of the commentators say that the bush was a thornbush. Literally, it says \u201cthe bush,\u201d simply meaning \u201cthe bush that was there,\u201d or because Moses, when he wrote the Torah, was referring to his own experience. But Deut. 33:16, in the blessing of Joseph, calls God \u201cHim that dwells in the bush,\u201d suggesting to some that this was \u201cthe\u201d bush that God dwelt in. But what point would there be in mentioning this in connection with Joseph? Moreover, \u201cdwell\u201d means to live somewhere permanently, whereas God merely appeared in the bush for a few moments. So Saadia says that the word has two different meanings: \u201cthornbush\u201d here and \u201cheaven\u201d in Deut. 33:16. Others say that it means \u201cheaven\u201d even here. But the correct meaning is a kind of dry bush, as in Arabic. The name Sinai derives from this word as well. Those who think it means \u201cheaven\u201d understand all aflame as in \u201cthe mountain was ablaze with flames\u201d (Deut. 4:11, 5:20, 9:15)\u2014not that the heavens were literally burning, but that flames appeared there. But they have ignored the bush was not consumed and \u201cwhy doesn\u2019t the bush burn up?\u201d (v. 3), which confirm that the reference is to a bush, something that could burn up. For the word translated \u201cburn\u201d really means to destroy or sweep away, as in 1 Kings 14:10. With regard to God \u201cspeaking from the bush,\u201d I will hint at the implications of this later in the chapter.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAn angel of the Lord appeared to him in a blazing fire. Ibn Ezra\u2019s explanation (at vv. 4 and 7) that \u201cGod\u201d refers to the angel is incorrect. For Moses, the great prophet, would not hide his face from an angel. Our Sages said in Genesis Rabbah that this angel was Michael. \u201cWherever anyone would see R. Jose the Tall, they would say, \u2018R. Judah the Prince must be here!\u2019 Similarly, every place where Michael appears, the Divine Presence is there also.\u201d What this means is that when Michael first appeared to Moses the Divine Presence was there, but he did not see it because he was unprepared for prophecy. When he did prepare himself, and turned aside to see, a vision of the Shekhinah was revealed to him, and God called to him from the midst of the bush. But the True interpretation is that this angel was the Redeemer Angel of whom God said, \u201cMy Name is in him\u201d (23:21). It is this angel of whom v. 4 says, \u201cGod called to him out of the bush,\u201d for that aspect of God that is engaged in the management of the lower world is called \u201cangel.\u201d Compare similarly Deut. 26:8, \u201cThe Lord freed us from Egypt,\u201d with Num. 20:16, \u201cHe sent an angel who freed us from Egypt.\u201d You will understand more about this farther on in my commentary, with the help of God. A bush all aflame. OJPS is closer to the Hebrew: This verse says that the bush burned, and in v. 3 Moses asks why it did not burn! But, as NJPS correctly has it, the same word means \u201caflame\u201d here and \u201cburning up\u201d in v. 3. Onkelos explains it this way as well. But perhaps the word in v. 3 is not \u201cburn,\u201d but the homonym that means \u201csweep away, remove\u201d (as in Deut. 17:7 and many other verses in Deuteronomy). For Biblical Hebrew frequently uses homonyms together for stylistic reasons (e.g., \u201cburros\u201d and \u201cboroughs\u201d in Judg. 10:4).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAn angel. Maimonides (Guide 2:6,41) says that Moses did not see an angel in the fire; the angel appeared to him as fire. But there are a number of arguments against this. For one, \u201cGod [i.e., the angel] called to him out of the bush\u201d (v. 5). Are we supposed to think that the fire said to him, \u201cI am the God of your father\u201d (v. 6)?! \u201cThis marvelous sight\u201d (v. 3) was the angel; the burning bush was secondary (Abarbanel). In a blazing fire. To accustom him to this, so he would not be alarmed at the fire and lightning when the Torah was given at Sinai (Hizkuni). The bush was not consumed. So, too, Israel would not be consumed despite Egyptian oppression (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 3:3\u20135
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 If Moses was standing on \u201choly ground\u201d (v. 5), why did God wait until he turned to look before telling him to remove his sandals?
\n\u2666 Why did Moses not bow down to the angel as did Abraham, Joshua, and Manoah and his wife in similar situations?
\n\u2666 Why are we not told that Moses followed the instructions to take off his shoes?
\nExodus 3:3
\nRASHI
\nTurn aside. This does not mean just to turn, but to go in the new direction.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI must turn aside. It means not merely \u201cto turn,\u201d but to leave one\u2019s place and go in that direction. This marvelous sight. This is the first \u201csign\u201d written in the Torah that God performed through His prophet Moses, the sign to which v. 12 refers. According to Japheth b. Ali, the fire represents Pharaoh and the bush that will not be consumed represents Israel.
\nExodus 3:4
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord saw. The angel from v. 2; the text refers to him here by the name of the Holy One.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhen the Lord saw that he had turned aside to look, God called to him. Here, too, Moses could only write this later. \u201cLord\u201d and \u201cGod\u201d here both refer to a lesser divine being, the \u201cangel\u201d of v. 2; I shall explain this further in my comment to 23:21, \u201cMy Name is in him.\u201d Or perhaps it means that when the Lord saw that Moses had turned aside, He commanded the divine being, the angel, to call to Moses. This would explain why two different terms are used. The Hebrew word translated \u201cGod\u201d may refer to any holy being without a material body; here, as I say, it refers to an angel.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Lord saw \u2026 God called. \u201cLord\u201d refers to the First Cause; \u201cGod\u201d to the angel (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 3:5
\nIBN EZRA
\nDo not come closer. Stay where you are; do not approach the burning bush.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nDo not come closer. Moses had not yet reached the highest level of prophecy. For at Mount Sinai he did indeed approach the cloud where God was (20:21). It is the same with the hiding of God\u2019s face (33:20)\u2014he had not yet attained what is said of him in Num. 12:8, \u201che beholds the likeness of the Lord.\u201d For the place on which you stand is holy ground. Even though he was still distant from the bush, He warned him about the place where he was already standing, for the entire mountain was rendered holy by the descent of the Shekhinah to its peak, just as at the time of the giving of the Torah. Moses was, in fact, on the mountain, for he had gone up there (see v. 1). The bush was at the very top of the mountain, but the entire mountain was holy, and wearing shoes was forbidden on it. For the Sages have already told us, \u201cEvery place where the Shekhinah appears, wearing shoes is forbidden.\u201d See also Josh. 5:15, and note that the priests in the sanctuary served in bare feet.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nRemove your sandals. Since the shoe treads everywhere, including unclean places, it is not to proper to bring it into a sacred place (Bekhor Shor). God meant: Abandon your material perspective; there is no natural explanation for the survival of the bush, any more than there will be for Israel\u2019s redemption, which it represents. Both are miraculous and providential (Abarbanel). From your feet. For the Hebrew word translated \u201csandals\u201d here means \u201cgloves\u201d unless feet are specified (Bekhor Shor). Holy ground. If the Divine Presence waits at a place to reveal Itself to the prophet, the place is considered holy ground (19:21\u201325; Josh. 5:14\u201315); but not when the Divine Presence comes to the prophet, as in most cases (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 3:6\u20138
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God call Himself \u201cthe God of your father\u201d (v. 6) rather than of \u201cyour fathers,\u201d Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?
\n\u2666 Why does God call Himself the God of each Patriarch individually, rather than simply \u201cGod of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob\u201d as in v. 16?
\n\u2666 Why does v. 8 repeat \u201cland\u201d unnecessarily in \u201ca land flowing with milk and honey,\u201d but refer to \u201cthe region of the Canaanites\u201d rather than \u201cthe land of the Canaanites\u201d?
\nExodus 3:6
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe God of your father. The messenger\u2014the angel\u2014speaks in the voice of the One who sent him. He continues by mentioning Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, though Moses\u2019 real \u201cfathers\u201d are Levi, Kohath, and Amram. For the first three were prophets in their own right. Moreover, all of Israel is descended from them, but not from Levi; and all Israel is really being addressed here in the person of Moses.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI am \u2026 the God of your father. The straightforward sense is just as if it said \u201cthe God of your fathers.\u201d It uses the singular rather than the plural to imply \u201cthe God of each of the Patriarchs\u201d individually. For every male ancestor can be called \u201cfather.\u201d Thus Hezekiah is told, \u201cthe God of your father David\u201d (2 Kings 20:5), and Moses sang at the sea, \u201cThis is my God and I will enshrine Him; the God of my father, and I will exalt Him\u201d (15:2), meaning \u201cthe God of my fathers.\u201d Ibn Ezra says it refers to Abraham, who first began to use the Name, though his father and brothers were idolaters; note that the verse goes on to mention him specifically, and then adds the other two Patriarchs. In the opinion of our Sages, it means \u201cyour father Amram,\u201d implying \u201cI am your God\u201d but associating His name with Moses\u2019 late, righteous father rather than with the living son. Afterward he calls himself the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, meaning \u201cthe God of all Israel.\u201d The reason it says \u201cthe God of\u201d each one individually rather than \u201cthe God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob\u201d is that each is a separate appellation of God, may He be blessed and exalted; I will explain this further at v. 15.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe was afraid to look. For the student ought not look boldly into the face of his master (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 3:7
\nRASHI
\nI am mindful of their sufferings. The verb is simply \u201cknow,\u201d as in 2:25, \u201ctook notice.\u201d The implication in both cases is: I have turned My attention to observe and understand their pains, and have not hidden My eyes, and I will not stop up My ears from hearing their cry.
\nRASHBAM
\nI have \u2026 heeded their outcry because of their taskmasters. The outcry they are making because of their taskmasters\u2014I have heeded it.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord continued. These too are the words of the angel, speaking in the name of the One who sent him. Notice how Jacob in his blessing to Joseph refers to \u201cthe God in whose ways my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked\u201d (Gen. 48:15) and then calls Him \u201cthe Angel who has redeemed me from all harm\u201d (Gen. 48:16). Just as the angel of the Lord was with the Patriarchs, and they went wherever he led them, so he would be with their descendants. And don\u2019t be shocked that an angel could be called by the name of God; remember that Moses will be \u201cGod\u201d to Aaron\u2019s \u201cprophet\u201d (4:16), though both of them are human beings. That is why the Lord is called \u201cGod of gods\u201d (Deut. 10:17). I have marked well. The violence that is done to them in secret, which cannot be seen by human eyes, I have seen. I \u2026 have heeded their outcry, which can be heard by all, but also I am mindful of their sufferings, which are concealed within their hearts.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord continued. When He describes how He has taken pity on the people, the text uses \u201cLord,\u201d the name associated with the merciful aspect of the divinity, even though in the entire rest of the chapter it is always \u201cGod,\u201d the name associated with the divine aspect of justice, who speaks to Moses.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Lord continued. In order not to frighten Moses, the intensity of the prophetic experience rose gradually from the angel (v. 2) to God (v. 4) to the Lord (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 3:8
\nRASHBAM
\nI have come down here to speak to you in order to rescue them from the Egyptians.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI have come down. God\u2019s glory fills the entire world; but His decrees come down from heaven (which is more exalted) to affect things on earth. Also, following protocol, Moses ought to have gone to the angel rather than vice versa; but Moses was unable to do this and so the angel had to come down. To bring them out. OJPS brings out the contrast: \u201cI have come down \u2026 to bring them up.\u201d Just as I dwell on high, I will have them dwell in the highest place on earth: \u201cHe set him atop the highlands\u201d (Deut. 32:13), for they left a land where they were impoverished for a good land. The region of the Canaanites. The Girgashites, smallest of the seven nations of Canaan, are not mentioned here. It is worth asking why the Canaanites are mentioned specifically when the other six nations were all Canaanites. The whole country was called Canaan, and the smaller nations were all subsumed under this general term.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI have come down to rescue them. That is, I have revealed Myself on this mountain in fire; the same applies to \u201cThe Lord came down upon Mount Sinai\u201d and \u201cfor the Lord had come down upon it in fire\u201d (19:20,18). Or it may refer to God\u2019s attribute of mercy, as in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, \u201cI will go down to see whether they have acted altogether according to the outcry that has reached Me\u201d (Gen. 18:21). I have already explained the mystery of that verse in its place. A good and spacious land, a land flowing with milk and honey. The land is introduced in terms of praise: its climate is \u201cgood\u201d and temperate, and everything good is found in it; it is \u201cspacious\u201d enough for the entire people to live out of reach of danger. Or perhaps it means spacious in the sense that it has lowlands, valleys, and plains, both great and small, and only a small part of it is mountains and ravines. The text goes on to praise it as a land for livestock, with good pasture and good water. Thus the animals would produce much \u201cmilk,\u201d for good, healthy milk-producers demand a good climate, much grass, and good water. And because good pasture is also found both in marshy areas and on the highest mountains, where the fruits are not particularly rich and beautiful, it goes on to say that the fruits of this land are so rich and sweet that it oozes with the \u201choney\u201d from them. \u201cThey shall come and shout on the heights of Zion, radiant over the bounty of the Lord\u2014over new grain and wine and oil, and over sheep and cattle. They shall fare like a watered garden\u201d (Jer. 31:11). Thus in Ezek. 20:6 it is called \u201ca land flowing with milk and honey \u2026 the fairest of all lands.\u201d The region of the Canaanites. Here it is not called \u201cthe land of the Canaanites,\u201d as it is everywhere else. The implication is that they would dispossess them and exterminate them and settle in their place, not that they would live among them as their ancestors had. The Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites. It mentions only six of the seven nations here, leaving out the Girgashites (see Deut. 7:1). Perhaps their part of the land was not flowing with milk and honey like that of the others. 23:23 also omits them, perhaps hinting that these six would be conquered first (which, according to Josh. 9:1, is what happened). But our Sages say that the Girgashites left the country and moved to Africa. This would explain why they are not mentioned among the six nations to be \u201cannihilated\u201d in 23:23. Here, too, it refers only to the nations that actually fought against them. I will speak more of this later in my commentary, with God\u2019s help.
\nExodus 3:9\u201311
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God say \u201cthe cry of the Israelites has reached Me\u201d (v. 9) when we already know from v. 7 that He has heard their cry?
\nExodus 3:9
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe cry of the Israelites. Their repentance. How the Egyptians oppress them. Jethro (18:11) refers to this as the Egyptians\u2019 \u201cschemes\u201d against Israel.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nNow the cry of the Israelites has reached Me. Even though He had already said in v. 7 that He had \u201cheeded their outcry,\u201d He adds here that it has \u201creached\u201d Him, that is, \u201cIt has reached My Throne of Glory, and I will no longer overlook what Pharaoh is doing, for the Egyptians are oppressing them too much.\u201d But the True interpretation of the cry of the Israelites is that the Shekhinah, who is also known as \u201cthe Assembly of Israel,\u201d had come crying to Him, as in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, \u201caccording to the outcry that has reached Me\u201d (Gen. 18:21), where I have hinted at this explanation. Moreover, I have seen how the Egyptians oppress them. The implication is that He will take revenge on Pharaoh and the Egyptians, because the oppression is more than had been decreed against them, as I explained in my comments to Gen. 15:13.
\nExodus 3:10
\nRASHI
\nCome, therefore, I will send you to Pharaoh. And should you ask what good that will do \u2026 you shall free My people. Your words will be enough to get them out of there.
\nRASHBAM
\nYou shall free My people, the Israelites, from Egypt. By means of the words you will say to Pharaoh from Me.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI will send you. To warn the Egyptians before I punish them (Sforno).
\nExodus 3:11
\nRASHI
\nWho am I? How am I important enough to speak with kings? That I should \u2026 free the Israelites? The words can be read as if Moses were asking, \u201cShould I free the Israelites?\u201d That is, even if I were important enough, do the Israelites really deserve having such a miracle done for them?
\nRASHBAM
\nBut Moses said to God, Who am I? Anyone who wants to understand the essential meaning of these verses in context will pay close attention to the explanation I am about to give. For my predecessors have not understood one bit of it. Moses\u2019 reply was directed to two things that the Holy One said to him: (1) that he should go to Pharaoh, and also (2) that he should free the Israelites by Pharaoh\u2019s command. Moses replied to each in turn. First, Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh?\u2014even to bring him an offering or a gift. Am I worthy of entering the king\u2019s court, a foreigner like me? Second, And free the Israelites from Egypt? That is, even if I were worthy of entering Pharaoh\u2019s presence for other matters, as far as freeing the Israelites goes, what could I say to Pharaoh that he would accept? Is Pharaoh foolish enough to listen to me and send a huge people, who are his slaves, away free from his land? What could I say to Pharaoh that he would accept, so that by my speaking I will free them from Egypt with Pharaoh\u2019s permission?
\nIBN EZRA
\nWho am I. To the statement that God was sending him to Pharaoh, Moses replied, \u201cI am a shepherd and he is a great king.\u201d And to the statement that he was to free the Israelites, he replied, \u201cWho am I to free such a great people?\u201d To which God replied in v. 12 with the assurance that He would be with him, and with a sign that this was so.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWho am I that I should \u2026 free the Israelites from Egypt? Moses did not think it would be possible to free the Israelites from Egypt unless they could immediately inherit the land of Canaan, and he thought their bad behavior had eliminated that possibility (Gersonides). He meant: It is a good land, and they were born here and are used to it\u2014just persuade Pharaoh to free them. There is no need to take them out of Egypt (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 3:12
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Moses, a bold, well-educated man, from a prominent tribe and brought up in the palace of the Pharaoh, try to get out of the mission for which God had chosen him (v. 11)?
\n\u2666 Why did God give Moses a sign when he did not ask for one? Surely seeing the angel was sign enough for him.
\n\u2666 If a sign was needed, it was needed now, not far in the future. So why tell Moses that one day \u201cyou shall worship God at this mountain\u201d (v. 12)?
\nExodus 3:12
\nRASHI
\nI will be with you. God answered Moses\u2019 questions in the order he asked them: You said, \u201cWho am I that I should go to Pharaoh?\u201d But it is not your assignment, it is Mine as well, for I will be with you. And that marvelous sight that you saw of the burning bush shall be your sign that it was I who sent you. And (unlike you) I am powerful enough to rescue them. Just as you saw the bush performing its assignment for Me without being consumed, so you, too, will go to perform an assignment for Me and not be harmed. As for your question about whether the Israelites deserve to leave Egypt, I benefit greatly by bringing them out, for three months after I do so, they are going to accept the Torah on this very mountain. Another reading: For I will be with you. And that, your success in your mission, shall be your sign of the following promise: I promise you that when you bring them out of Egypt, you shall serve Me on this mountain. For you will receive the Torah upon it, and this will make Israel lastingly deserving.\u2014There is a comparable example in 2 Kings 19:29\/Isa. 37:30. \u201cThis is the sign for you: This year you eat what grows of itself, and the next year what springs from that; and in the third year, sow and reap, and plant vineyards and eat their fruit.\u201d As in our verse, \u201cthis\u201d points to something previous\u2014the fall of Sennacherib\u2014that will be a sign for you of another promise: that even though your land is barren of fruit, I will bless what grows of itself.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Holy One answered him in the same order: (1) I will be with you, and will grant you favor in the king\u2019s eyes, and you shall go to Pharaoh without fear. As far as your fear when you are actually in Pharaoh\u2019s presence, that (pointing to the bush) shall be your sign that it was I who sent you. Don\u2019t you see from the burning of the bush that I (the angel) am the emissary of the Holy One? This is the sign for you to be confident that I will be with you. (We find the same thing with Gideon, when the angel tells him in Judg. 6:14, \u201cHave not I sent thee?\u201d) (2) As for your question, Shall I free the Israelites from Egypt, that is, what arguments can I offer to Pharaoh that will convince him to free them, When you have freed the people from Egypt, I command you now that you shall worship God at this mountain and offer sacrifices. This command will enable you to argue (in 5:1,3) that Pharaoh must let them go in order to sacrifice to God.
\nEven though this is not fully spelled out here, it is spelled out further along in v. 18. And Moses would make this same request each and every time he went to Pharaoh. There was a similar situation when the Holy One commanded Samuel to anoint David as king. Samuel said to the Holy One, \u201cIf Saul hears of it, he will kill me\u201d (1 Sam. 16:2). The Holy One told him, \u201cTake a heifer with you, and say, \u2018I have come to sacrifice to the Lord.\u2019 \u201d In the same way, God\u2019s commandment to Moses to bring the people to sacrifice was a stratagem, so he would have some plausible reason to give to Pharaoh for letting them go. Those who explain this passage in any other way are completely mistaken.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will be with you. This is God\u2019s reply to Moses\u2019 first objection. The ge\u2019onim say that these words are your sign that it was I who sent you. Others say that the sign is the burning bush. For this was a sign, too, in case Moses was in doubt that he was really getting a message from God. In my view, \u201csign\u201d as used in Hebrew has a number of meanings: an omen (1 Sam. 14:10); a confirmatory sign (2 Kings 19:29 and the nearly identical Isa. 37:30); a symbolic action (Isa. 8:18). What it means here is, this shall be a sign for you why I sent you: to free the people so that you may serve Me on this mountain (see Lev. 22:33). This is precisely what Moses tells Pharaoh: \u201cwe must go a distance of three days into the wilderness and sacrifice to the Lord our God\u201d (8:23). For it is a three-day journey from Egypt to Mount Sinai\u2014not from Pharaoh\u2019s capital, but from the border of Egypt: \u201cthree days into the wilderness.\u201d Don\u2019t be bothered by the fact that they traveled three days from the Red Sea and did not get to Mount Sinai; as the text explains, they did not take the direct route. In any case, such a large number of people could not travel as fast as the standard measure. It could also be that that shall be your sign is a reference to the bush as a sign that this was the place chosen for them to serve God.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will be with you; that shall be your sign. There have been many interpretations of this verse. But the correct understanding of the straightforward sense is that the Holy One told Moses two things: first, that He would come down to rescue them from Egypt, and second (though He might have rescued them in a way that would have left the Israelites in the land of Goshen itself, or nearby), He further promised to bring them entirely up out of that land to the region of the Canaanites. Both of these promises made Moses nervous, and he said, \u201c \u2018Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh?\u2019 (v. 11). I am the lowest of men, a shepherd, and he is a great king. If I tell him to leave the people completely alone, he will kill me.\u201d He said further, \u201c \u2018Who am I that I should \u2026 free the Israelites from Egypt\u2019 (v. 11) and bring them up (as you told me) to the land of Canaan? For \u2018that great nation [Israel] is a wise and discerning people\u2019 (Deut. 4:6). And they will not consider following me to a country of peoples \u2018greater and more numerous\u2019 (Deut. 4:38) than they, even if it is \u2018a good and spacious land\u2019 (v. 8). The first promise, the rescue from Pharaoh, is not dependent on them. If Pharaoh heeds me, he will lighten his yoke on them and thus \u2018rescue\u2019 them; or he might expel them from his land against their will. Moreover, they themselves would listen to any man on this subject, for what man is there who would not want to get out of such unprecedentedly harsh servitude? But they will not heed me with regard to going up to the land of the Canaanites.\u201d This is exactly how it turned out. The idea of war with those nations weighed heavily upon the Israelites from beginning to end, both in Egypt and in the wilderness. So our master Moses was afraid of Pharaoh and scared of how the Israelites would react as well. God answered both objections. He told him, \u201cHave no fear of Pharaoh, for \u2018I will be with you\u2019 to rescue you, and \u2018that shall be your sign\u2019 to the people that it was I who sent you to them. For when you have freed the people from Egypt, you shall worship God at this mountain. From that point on, they will accept the service of God, to follow His commandments, \u2018and so trust you ever after\u2019 (19:9). They will run after you wherever you command them to go. I have been revealed to you on this mountain in a blazing fire, for thus it shall be in the eyes of all the people when they serve Me at this mountain.\u201d Thus the same sign that reassured Moses not to fear Pharaoh (for God promised to rescue the Israelites) would reassure Israel (once they came to Mount Sinai) not to fear the peoples of Canaan. For they would not need a sign to make them heed Moses to go a three-days\u2019 journey out of Egypt, with Pharaoh\u2019s permission, in order to sacrifice to God. They would do it whether they wanted to or not. But the True interpretation is, \u201cthat\u201d shall be your sign, in the same sense as \u201cThat is my God and I will enshrine Him\u201d (15:2). God as much as told him, I will be with you, and the sign of the covenant is that I will be with you always. For it is I who sends you, so that you and the people may worship God at this mountain, and then I will go up in the midst of the people \u201cto the place that I have made ready\u201d (23:20)\u2014that is, the Temple.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThat shall be your sign. The fact that all the Israelites will agree to serve Me, when I give them the Torah at this mountain, will be a sign to you that they do indeed deserve to inherit the land of Canaan before the scheduled time (Gersonides).
\nExodus 3:13\u201314
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 As Maimonides asked in Guide 1:63, what is the point of Moses asking God what name he should give the Israelites (v. 13)? If they did not already know the name, it would be no proof that Moses was legitimate, and if they did, Moses would have known it, too.
\n\u2666 Did Moses himself not know God\u2019s name? If he did not, why didn\u2019t he ask for it on his own behalf?
\n\u2666 Why did Moses ask what name he should tell the Israelites before God even told him to speak to them?
\n\u2666 If God\u2019s name is really \u201cEhyeh-Asher-Ehyeh\u201d (v. 14), how can He subsequently call Himself just \u201cEhyeh\u201d?
\nExodus 3:13
\nRASHBAM
\nWhat shall I say to them? For I don\u2019t actually know Your personal name.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhat shall I say to them? Moses knows God\u2019s name; he is asking which of God\u2019s names to tell them. For God does not perform signs as \u201cShaddai,\u201d only as \u201cthe Lord.\u201d Jeshua b. Judah claims that Israel had a tradition that the One who would redeem them from Egypt would reveal a previously unknown divine name. He thinks that \u201cLord\u201d in God\u2019s promise to Abraham (Gen. 15:7) was written by Moses in the Torah, but not actually spoken to Abraham at the time. But this is incorrect. After all, Gen. 1:1\u20132:3 uses only \u201cGod\u201d; from Gen. 2:4 on, the expression is \u201cLord God\u201d; and from the birth of Cain on, it is only \u201cLord\u201d by itself. Whereas in the words of Moses the expression \u201cLord God\u201d appears only once, incidentally, in 9:30, in reply to an expression of Pharaoh\u2019s in 9:28. You will not find it anywhere else in the Torah.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAnd they ask me, \u2018What is His name?\u2019 This verse tells you, \u201cInterpret me!\u201d It makes no sense that Moses would ask for an answer to this question to use as a sign for the Israelites to believe him. For asking His name and telling it to them is no sign for one who does not believe in Him to begin with. For if Israel already knew that Name, and Moses knew it, too, his knowledge would be the same as theirs; this would not be any kind of sign or wonder. And if they had not heard of it, why would telling it to them make them believe him? Even after God informed him of the great Name, Moses still said, \u201cWhat if they do not believe me?\u201d (4:1)\u2014at which point God gave him signs to perform. Ibn Ezra says Moses asked which of God\u2019s names he should tell Israel, since He does not perform signs as \u201cGod Almighty,\u201d only as the Tetragrammaton. But I do not think he is correct. For Moses had not yet been told that God would perform great and miraculous signs and wonders as part of the departure from Egypt, only that He would rescue them from Egypt and bring them up to the land\u2014all of which He could certainly achieve as \u201cGod Almighty.\u201d He had already extricated Sarah from Pharaoh\u2019s palace with the \u201cmighty plagues\u201d (Gen. 12:17) that He inflicted upon him. And Abraham in Genesis 14 had defeated great kings\u2014all this with the help of God Almighty, the name known to the Patriarchs. He could do the same for their descendants. Moreover, Jacob had already said, \u201cGod will be with you and bring you back to the land of your fathers\u201d (Gen. 48:21). Joseph, too, said, \u201cWhen God has taken notice of you, you shall carry up my bones from here\u201d (Gen. 50:25). Both of them seemed to think that the name \u201cGod\u201d would be enough to do this.
\nIn my opinion, Moses was already at this time a \u201cfather in wisdom\u201d (as B. Meg. 13a calls him) and great in prophecy. By means of this question, he asked God to inform him who was sending him\u2014that is, by which of God\u2019s attributes he was being sent to them. Notice that in Isa. 48:16 the prophet announces which aspect of God has sent him: \u201cAnd now the Lord god has sent me, endowed with His spirit.\u201d Here is the implication of Moses\u2019 question: They will ask me about my mission, whether it is from God Almighty, who stood by the Patriarchs, or by the higher attribute of mercy, by means of which signs and wonders as yet uncreated can be performed. Remember that God had said to him, \u201cI am the God of your father, the God of Abraham\u201d (v. 6), not explicitly using any of His holy names. Moses understood him to be promising the giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai, but he knew that the Torah was not to be given by the God Almighty who was known to the Patriarchs, but by the great Name by which the world was created. That is why he asked, What shall I say to them? Our Sages were also awake to this implication; they saw that the point of Moses\u2019 question was really that he himself wanted to know God\u2019s name.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhat is His name? Moses was not asking for an identifier, but for a name of the kind that describes the essential quality of the thing it names (Gersonides).
\nExodus 3:14
\nRASHI
\nEhyeh-Asher-Ehyeh. \u201cI will be\u201d with you in this trouble \u201cas I will be\u201d with you when you are enslaved by other kingdoms.\u2014Moses said to Him, \u201cMaster of the Universe! You want me to let them know that they will have more troubles? One trouble at a time is enough for them!\u201d God replied, \u201cYou have spoken well. Just say Ehyeh, the first \u2018I will be.\u2019 \u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nGod said to Moses, If you don\u2019t know My name, I will tell you. For My name is Ehyeh, \u201cI will be,\u201d forever. And I can carry out what I promise. Now that I have told you My name is Ehyeh, Thus shall you say to the Israelites, \u201cEhyeh sent me to you.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nEhyeh-Asher-Ehyeh. The meaning of \u201cEhyeh,\u201d as He explained, is \u201casher-ehyeh\u201d\u2014that is, \u201cI [always] Am.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nEhyeh-Asher-Ehyeh. Rashi, quoting a midrash from B. Ber. 9b, explains that the first Ehyeh, \u201cI will be,\u201d refers to their trouble in Egypt, and the second to future troubles. What this midrash means is that when Moses asked the Blessed One what His name was, he wanted to teach the Israelites the Name that would give them complete instruction about His existence and His providence. The Holy One answered him, \u201cWhy would they ask My name? They need no other proof than that I will be with them\u2014in all their troubles they will call Me and I will answer them.\u201d And this is the greatest possible proof that there is a God in Israel \u201cso close at hand \u2026 whenever we call upon Him\u201d (Deut. 4:7) and that \u201cthere is, indeed, divine justice on earth\u201d (Ps. 58:12). The explanation in this midrash is correct. Another midrash interprets Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh as follows: Just as you are with Me, I am with you. If you open your hands and give charity, I, too, will open My hands: \u201cThe Lord will open for you His bounteous store\u201d (Deut. 28:12). If you do not open your hands, what is written there? \u201cWhen He holds back the waters, they dry up\u201d (Job 12:15). Another midrash: R. Isaac said: The Holy One said to Moses, Tell them it is I who was, I who am now, and I who will be. That is why Ehyeh is written here three times. The explanation of R. Isaac\u2019s opinion is as follows. Since past and future are all present for the Creator\u2014for with Him there is no time, and in Him there is no change\u2014and none of His days have passed, therefore He is called by all the tenses in a single Name, signifying that His existence is necessary always. Onkelos translated Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh as \u201cI will be with whom I will be.\u201d But he did not translate the name at all in the phrase Thus shall you say to the Israelites, \u201cEhyeh sent me to you.\u201d Apparently Onkelos thought that Ehyeh was the Name and Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh the explanation of its meaning. For Moses\u2019 question was aimed at discovering God\u2019s ways from His Name, just as he later asked, \u201cPray let me know Your ways, that I may know You\u201d (33:13). In that place God answered him, \u201cI will proclaim before you the name Lord, and the grace that I grant and the compassion that I show\u201d (33:19), to say that by means of the Tetragrammaton that He called out before him God grants grace and shows compassion. No one can penetrate the depth of His profundity, which is why Onkelos translates here, \u201cI will be with whom I will be\u201d\u2014with My Name. Tell the Israelites it is \u201cI will be\u201d\u2014for by its means I am with man to grant grace and show compassion. Saadia wrote that it was to be explained to mean that He had not passed into existence and would not pass out of existence, for He is the first and the last. This is close to what R. Isaac said. Maimonides says in the Guide (1:63) that God is necessarily existent and cannot ever be nonexistent. According to these scholars, it must be explained that the Holy One said to Moses that he should tell them that Name and teach it to them, that is, that Moses should teach them the rational arguments that these scholars use to prove God\u2019s necessary, imperishable existence. For mention of the Name alone\u2014however he might say it\u2014is no argument to eliminate belief in the preexistence of the universe, or the heretical belief that completely denies God\u2019s existence. But this is not what the text means. Rather, the mere mention of the Name was the proof; it was the \u201csign\u201d in reply to what they would ask him. In my opinion, the elders of Israel could not have had any doubt about the existence of the Creator, God forbid, as Maimonides suggested. Rather, the Name was the answer to Moses\u2019 question, as we have explained to you. God informed him that he was being sent to the Israelites by the attribute of justice that is within the attribute of mercy. That is why He told Moses, \u201cThus shall you say to the Israelites, \u2018Ehyeh sent me to you.\u2019 \u201d Moses was to tell them only \u201cEhyeh\u201d a single time in order to teach them of the unity of God. That is why he is further commanded to tell them, \u201cThe Lord \u2026 has sent me to you\u201d (v. 15). For this Name\u2014the Tetragrammaton\u2014signifies the attribute of mercy, and they would know that He would \u201cmake His glorious arm march at the right hand of Moses\u201d (Isa. 63:12), and perform new signs and wonders upon the earth. But to Moses He explained that the \u201cEhyeh\u201d that He commanded him to tell them was in fact the Name we read as \u201cLord,\u201d similar in meaning and in spelling. For the two last letters of Ehyeh are the first two letters of the Tetragrammaton. The \u05d0 with which it begins, the first letter of the alphabet, is an indicator of precedence and of unity. The \u05d9 with which the other Name begins, the 10th letter, indicates the 10 sefirot. And these two letters, \u05d0 and \u05d9, the initial letters of the two holy Names, are written as the first and last letters of the euphemism with which we replace the Name, \u05d0\u05d3\u05e0\u05d9, Adonai (\u201cLord\u201d)\u2014to teach that He is Lordliness from beginning to end \u2014leaving \u05d3\u05e0, which refers to the attribute of justice (\u05d3\u05d9\u05df), in the middle. For \u201cMy Name is in the middle of it\u201d (23:21). That is why this Name is spelled \u201cAdonai\u201d instead of the standard grammatical form adoni, \u201cmy lord,\u201d which would be used with human beings. For all kingship, lordship, and authority comes from God. May the Holy One show us wonders from His Torah.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nEhyeh-Asher-Ehyeh. Since \u201cLord\u201d would make no sense in this context, \u201cEhyeh\u201d is used as the euphemism for the Tetragrammaton. I disagree with Rashbam to v. 15; if he were correct, God would call Himself \u201cEhyeh\u201d throughout the Torah (Bekhor Shor). Unlike other names, which denote God by His actions, this name denotes God\u2019s most essential quality, His existent, unitary being (Gersonides).
\nExodus 3:15
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since God tells Moses to say to the Israelites that \u201cthe Lord\u201d sent him to them\u2014a name which is \u201cHis appellation for all eternity\u201d (v. 15)\u2014what need is there for the name Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh?
\nExodus 3:15
\nRASHI
\nThis shall be My name forever. We read le\u2019olam, \u201cforever,\u201d but it is spelled le\u2019alem, \u201cto be concealed\u201d (in the sense that it must not be read as it is written). God is saying: \u201cThis\u2014YHWH\u2014is My name that you shall write, and this\u2014Adonai\u2014is My appellation, by which you shall call Me.\u201d David says something similar in Ps. 135:13.
\nRASHBAM
\nGod said further to Moses. It is not proper for them to use My name in everyday speech, just as one doesn\u2019t call kings by their names. So tell them, The Lord, the God of your fathers. That is an expression of lordship and kingship, just as one does not use the king\u2019s name when talking about him, but says, \u201cthe king\u201d: \u201cThe king has ordered me on a mission\u201d (1 Sam. 21:3). This\u2014the \u201cEhyeh\u201d of v. 14\u2014shall be My name forever, and this\u2014the royal \u201cLord\u201d of v. 15\u2014My appellation. One mentions a king by his appellation, not by his name. As to why we write the Tetragrammaton with a \u05d9 instead of an \u05d0, as He told it to Moses, I shall explain that in code: \u2026 This is the essence of the deep meaning of this passage. But it should not be explained except to those who are discreet.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAnd God said further \u2026 The Lord. This Name in Hebrew, the Tetragrammaton, is the same, and means the same, as \u201cEhyeh,\u201d except that \u201cEhyeh\u201d is grammatically in the first person and the Tetragrammaton is in the third person, both from the verb \u201cto be.\u201d Both of these, like \u201cYah,\u201d are God\u2019s personal name. Now I must expatiate at length, in order to explain the meaning of this Name and its letters; something about the secret of the Name; and why the Name is not read as it is written. The first two letters of the name spelled out\u2014\u05d9\u05d5\u05d3 \u05d4\u05d0\u2014are numerically equivalent to the Tetragrammaton. Abraham (Gen. 15:7, 24:7) and Jacob (Gen. 28:13) knew this name, but not fully, for God appeared to them more often as El Shaddai. So the Tetragrammaton was not fully known until the arrival of Moses, who made it known to all the world. This is the meaning of \u201cI appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but I did not make Myself known to them by My name YHWH\u201d (6:3). Even Pharaoh knew that there was a God; he merely did not know this Name. That is why this Name is not found in the description of creation in Genesis 1. Nor is it found in the book of Ecclesiastes. There is also a 72-letter name; see my comment to 14:19.\u2026 Though most prophets receive their communications through an angelic intermediary, Moses received them directly from God. That is how he could perform signs and wonders whose like had never been created anywhere in the world\u2014by the power of the Name. That is why Jethro says, \u201cNow I know that the Lord is greater than all gods\u201d (18:11). One who understands this mystery will understand about the three angels who appeared to Abraham (Gen. 18:1), the \u201cman\u201d who wrestled with Jacob (Gen. 32:25), and the burning bush. In my opinion all of these were the second one. But I cannot explain this. \u2026 But the Tetragrammaton is both a noun with a meaning\u2014a term describing the One who maintains all things in existence, and also a proper noun\u2014God\u2019s unique personal Name. That is why we never pronounce it, but always use instead the euphemisms Lord or god. For the vowels printed with the Tetragrammaton are merely the vowels of \u201cLord\u201d or \u201cGod,\u201d but these are only two of 320 possible vowel combinations. One who is educated in Hebrew grammar can intuit the pronunciation of the Name from such forms of it as \u201cEhyeh\u201d and \u201cYah\u201d; even the name of Elijah the prophet will teach one rightly. But this is all secret.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThis shall be My appellation for all eternity. \u201cThe God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.\u201d For God will never forget His covenant with the Patriarchs. In all generations, when the Jews pray to \u201cthe God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,\u201d He will hear them and answer them. But according to the True interpretation, This shall be My name forever refers to \u201cThe God of Abraham, the God of Isaac,\u201d and This shall be My appellation to \u201cthe God of Jacob,\u201d which is why the latter expression is separated from the other two by \u201cand.\u201d That is also why the words translated \u201cfor all eternity\u201d are spelled without vowel letters. One who is enlightened will understand.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThis shall be My name forever. Unlike names that describe actions, the name that describes the essential is always valid (Gersonides). The wise men of every age, ancient and modern, have realized that there must exist one eternal, unchangeable Being (Sforno).
\nExodus 3:16
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since vv. 15 and 16 seem to repeat the same instruction, why are they both necessary? Moreover, what explains the numerous differences between the two verses?
\nExodus 3:16
\nRASHI
\nThe elders of Israel. Those who were on the council. For if you think it means all the elders, how could he possibly gather all the elders of 600,000 people?
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod of Abraham. Who made a covenant with him to give him the land of Canaan. I have taken note of you. Literally, \u201ctaking note I have taken note.\u201d I promised Abraham I would take note of you, and the time for taking note has now come.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe elders of Israel. For it was inappropriate to teach divine mysteries to any but the wise (Abarbanel). I have taken note of you because you are the descendants of the Patriarchs, and of what is being done to you because I hate cruelty and violence (Sforno).
\nExodus 3:17\u201320
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did God tell Moses to deceitfully request in His name a \u201cthree days\u2019 journey\u201d into the wilderness (v. 18) rather than demanding \u201cLet My people go\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why does God say that He knows Pharaoh will not permit the people to go (v. 19, OJPS), when this is in fact what ends up happening?
\nExodus 3:17
\nIBN EZRA
\nI have declared. Long ago, to the Patriarchs (Gen. 15:14 and 46:4). Or it may mean, \u201cI now hereby declare.\u201d
\nExodus 3:18
\nRASHI
\nThey will listen to you. If you use the phrase \u201cI have taken note of you\u201d (v. 16), they will listen to you, for Jacob and Joseph left them this phrase as a code word to let them know that when they heard it they would be redeemed. Jacob told them, \u201cGod will surely take notice of you\u201d (Gen. 50:24), and Joseph too told them, \u201cWhen God has taken notice of you\u201d (Gen. 50:25).
\nRASHBAM
\nGod of the Hebrews. For they came here from the other side of the river, and they must serve the God of their own kingdom.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey will listen to you. As indeed they did. The Hebrews. The three Patriarchs, who are both genetically and morally descendants of Eber. Manifested Himself. The implication is found in the full expression (5:3), where to our verse is added, \u201clest He strike us with pestilence or sword.\u201d I will explain the expression \u201clest He strike us\u201d in my comment to Lev. 1:1.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThey will listen to you. Automatically. So Rashi explains. The difficulty is that he attributes one of the sayings to Jacob, though Joseph said them both. Perhaps he understands Joseph\u2019s saying it twice to imply that he had it as a tradition from his father. Exodus Rabbah asks, \u201cWhy would they listen automatically? Because they possessed a tradition that anyone who came to them with a promise of redemption and said this special phrase was indeed a true redeemer.\u201d One has to wonder why they would believe Moses\u2014perhaps he had merely heard the tradition just as they had. It must be that they had received a tradition from Joseph, which he had heard from the mouth of their father Jacob, the prophet, that the first who would come and speak to them using these words would be the one to redeem them. The Holy One knew full well that no one would come and deceive them with these words, and gave them this promise. But elsewhere, in Exodus Rabbah, I have found: \u201cR. Hama said in the name of R. Hanina: Moses was 12 when he was abducted from his father\u2019s house. For if he had grown up in his father\u2019s house and come and told them these words, they would not have believed him, thinking that his father had simply told them to him: \u2018Joseph told Levi, Levi told Kohath, and Kohath told Amram, Moses\u2019 father.\u2019 That is why he was abducted from his father\u2019s house. So when he came and told Israel all the words, \u2018the people were convinced\u2019 (4:31).\u201d By saying that Joseph told Levi, they mean that Jacob had revealed his secret to Joseph because of his love for him. When Joseph told all his brothers to bring his bones back from Egypt, he used those very words, \u201ctake note\u201d (Gen. 50:25); but he revealed to Levi that he had used those words because of the tradition that he had from Jacob, and he commanded Levi to keep the matter a secret.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe God of the Hebrews. This phrase occurs only 6 times in the whole Bible, all in the Book of Exodus: 3:18, 5:3, 7:16, 9:1, 9:13, and 10:3 (Masorah).
\nExodus 3:19\u201320
\nNAHMANIDES
\nOnly because of a greater might. Literally, \u201cnot by a mighty hand.\u201d Rashi explains: Until I make him aware that My might is greater, he will not let you go. But I take it to mean: He will not let you go on account of words, nor on account of your might deployed against him, until I send My might against him, with various wonders which I will work upon them. \u201cBy a mighty hand, by an outstretched arm and awesome power, and by signs and portents\u201d (Deut. 26:8). Only then will he release you; for all these will come upon him before they let you go.
\nExodus 3:19
\nRASHI
\nThe king of Egypt will let you go only if I show him My greater might. That is, following the OJPS, \u201cexcept by a mighty hand\u201d he will not let you go. But literally the phrase is \u201cnot by a mighty hand,\u201d which some explain to mean \u201cnot because his hand is mighty,\u201d since as soon as \u201cI stretch out My hand, I will smite Egypt\u201d (v. 20). This is the explanation of the Targum, which translates, \u201cNot because his power is strong.\u201d This was told me in the name of R. Jacob b. Menahem.
\nRASHBAM
\nYet I know that the king of Egypt will let you go only because of a greater might. Read preferably with OJPS, \u201cAnd I know that the king of Egypt will not give you leave to go, except by a mighty hand,\u201d but even more literally, \u201cnot by a mighty hand.\u201d God is saying: Do not lose courage because he does not immediately heed My command to let them go. His refusal has nothing to do with his \u201cgreater might,\u201d for he has no power to contend with Me. But I am hardening his heart in order first to send My hand against him, so all will know that I have the upper hand. They will know by means of My marvels that I am the Lord and that all power is in My hands.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWill let you go only because of a greater might. Saadia interprets this to mean, he will not let you go at first, until I strike him with even greater might.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nOnly because of a greater might. Seeing how Moses complained (5:22\u201323) even though God warned him Pharaoh would refuse to let them go, imagine if God had not forewarned him! (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 3:20
\nIBN EZRA
\nMy hand. That is, the instrument by which My might is delivered.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI will \u2026 smite Egypt with various wonders. Hoping that at least some of them will repent (Sforno).
\nExodus 3:21\u20134:2
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How could Moses say \u201cWhat if they do not believe me?\u201d (v. 1) once God has promised him \u201cThey will listen to you\u201d (3:18)?
\nExodus 3:21
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will dispose the Egyptians favorably toward this people. When he does let you go\u2014as noted in Gen. 15:14. As I will explain in my comment to 12:36, the Egyptians actually begged the Israelites to borrow their wealth. This is quite miraculous, totally the opposite of the ordinary way of the world.
\nExodus 3:22
\nRASHBAM
\nEach woman shall borrow from her neighbor. Read with OJPS, \u201cask of her neighbor\u201d\u2014as an outright gift. For in v. 21 God says, \u201cI will dispose the Egyptians favorably toward this people.\u201d This fits with the promise in Ps. 2:8, \u201cAsk it of Me, and I will make the nations your domain.\u201d This is the essence of the straightforward meaning, and it is a refutation of the Christian understanding of the verse. Objects of silver and gold. Jewelry for the festival they were to celebrate in the wilderness.
\nIBN EZRA
\nEach woman shall borrow. In 12:35, the borrowing is done by all the Israelites. The reference is to \u201cwoman\u201d here because it is more common for women than for men to borrow finery from their neighbors. Such is still the custom in the Islamic world, though not here among the uncircumcised. The lodger in her house. Thus the Israelites were landowners in their own region. Let those who call our ancestors thieves realize that all this was a divine command, not to be questioned, given by the One who created everything and can take it from one and give it to another. There is nothing wrong in this, for everything is His. Stripping the Egyptians. As in Gen. 31:9, in the story of Jacob and Laban, the verb means to take something away from an oppressor and give it in recompense to the one who was oppressed.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nObjects of silver and gold, and clothing. In payment for the things they would have to leave behind for the neighbors because they were too heavy to move (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 4:1
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhat if they do not believe me? God had told him that the elders would \u201clisten\u201d (v. 18), but He did not say explicitly that they would \u201cbelieve.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhat if they do not believe me and do not listen to me? \u201cMoses spoke improperly when he said this. The Holy One had told him, \u2018They will listen to you\u2019 (3:18). And here he is saying \u2018What if they do not believe me?\u2019! Yet the Holy One responded immediately by giving him signs to perform, as if Moses\u2019 words were right\u201d (Exodus Rabbah). Ibn Ezra says that what God told him in 3:18 is that the elders would believe him, not the entire people, or that perhaps they might \u201clisten\u201d to him but not completely believe him. But this is not correct. It could be that \u201cthey will listen to you\u201d was not a promise to Moses, but a commandment to the people: \u201cthey must listen to you,\u201d and you and the elders must go to the king of Egypt. Similarly, \u201cthey will believe\u201d in v. 8 means \u201cthey ought to believe.\u201d There are many other such occurrences. But I think it simply means, \u201cThey will heed you and go with you to the king and tell him, \u2018The God of the Hebrews has manifested Himself to us.\u2019 \u201d What would they have to lose? But God had already informed him that the king of Egypt would not let them go. This is why Moses said, What if they do not believe me? After seeing that Pharaoh would not let them go, they would no longer listen to him at all. What if they \u2026 say: The Lord did not appear to you? \u201cFor if you were indeed God\u2019s messenger, Pharaoh would not have treated His word with contempt.\u201d Or perhaps they would say, \u201cGod did not appear to you by the name Lord, His attribute of mercy, to perform signs and wonders for us as you claimed\u2014for you are not greater than the Patriarchs. That is why Pharaoh did not heed you! For if Pharaoh believed your words, we would be leaving Egypt no matter what, and our iniquities would be no barrier between us and God\u2019s mercy.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhat if they do not believe me? For one might discover God\u2019s name by intellectual effort as well as by prophecy (Gersonides).
\nExodus 4:2
\nRASHI
\nWhat is that in your hand? \u201cWhat is that\u201d is spelled unusually\u2014as a contraction\u2014to provide an occasion for midrash. For in this spelling it can also be read to say \u201cwith what\u201d: with what is in your hand you deserve whipping, for presuming to think the Israelites would doubt My signs. Even the straightforward meaning is not that God did not know what it was, but that He was setting up the effect, like someone who says, \u201cYou agree that this is a stone?\u201d \u201cYes.\u201d \u201cI\u2019m going to turn it into a piece of wood.\u201d
\nExodus 4:3\u20138
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did God choose these particular signs\u2014the snake (v. 3), the leprous hand (v. 6), and the Nile (v. 9)\u2014and not others?
\n\u2666 Why did God have Moses perform the first two of the signs right there on the spot?
\n\u2666 Why is it only the sign of the snake that is said (v. 5) to prove that the Lord appeared to Moses?
\n\u2666 Why must v. 5 call God \u201cthe God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why would God defile Moses by making his hand leprous (v. 6), rather than turning it into sapphire or something similar?
\n\u2666 Why does Moses have to put his hand into his bosom in order for it to become leprous and then again to be cured, especially since his hand did not become leprous \u201cuntil he took it out\u201d?
\n\u2666 What makes God think (v. 8) that if they do not believe the first sign, they will believe the second one?
\n\u2666 Why does God say, if they do not \u201chearken to the voice of the first sign \u2026 the voice of the latter sign\u201d (OJPS)?
\nExodus 4:3
\nRASHI
\nIt became a snake. This was a hint to Moses that he had slandered Israel by doubting that they would believe; for slander is the craft of the snake.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIt became a snake. This sign was not given so that Moses would believe\u2014the burning bush took care of that\u2014but so he could perform it to convince the Israelites. God gave him signs to perform with what he would have at hand. The \u201crod\u201d was the cane of an elderly man (not a shepherd\u2019s staff, for Moses would not enter Pharaoh\u2019s presence as a shepherd). Those who have tried to explain this phenomenon scientifically are full of hot air; it is a miracle, not a natural phenomenon. Japheth thinks this sign was a message to Pharaoh. A harmless rod turns into a monstrous snake (as God calls Pharaoh in Ezek. 29:3); but at last it turns back into a rod as if it had never been a snake.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHe said, \u201cCast it on the ground.\u201d He cast it on the ground. I could not understand why God performed these signs for Moses. For Moses already believed that it was the Holy One who was speaking with him. God should have told him, \u201cCast the rod in your hand on the ground before them and it will become a snake\u201d\u2014and similarly with the second sign. This, after all, is what he did with the third sign, turning water into blood (v. 9). So the words of our Sages are believable: Showing him the snake was a sign that he had slandered the Israelites by doubting that they would believe, and making his hand leprous (v. 6) was his punishment for it. That is why Moses recoiled from it\u2014he was afraid he was going to be punished by being bitten by the snake. It is instinctive to recoil from such a thing, even when you know intellectually that if God wants it to happen there is no escape from it. And perhaps, having revealed to him the Ineffable Name by which the world was created and all things come into being, God wanted to show him that all kinds of miraculous alterations of nature could be performed by invoking it, and to strengthen Moses in the realization that he could really perform such actions, unprecedented as they were. For this purpose the first two signs were enough for Moses; and in any case there was no water there. So He merely commanded Moses to perform the third sign without having him do it on the spot.
\nExodus 4:5
\nIBN EZRA
\nThat they may believe. That is, do this with the rod in order that they may believe.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThat they may believe. An abbreviated verse. It is to be understood as follows: I am showing you these signs in order to have you perform them before the Israelites, so that they may believe the Lord appeared to you.
\nExodus 4:6
\nRASHI
\nEncrusted with snowy scales. Rather, \u201cleprous,\u201d with OJPS; \u201csnowy\u201d because leprosy is white (see Lev. 13:4). This too was a hint that suggesting the Israelites would not believe was slander; in showing him the sign, God afflicted him with leprosy just as He would later do to Miriam (Num. 12:10) when she slandered Moses.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYour bosom. Saadia understood this word to mean \u201csleeve.\u201d Others understand it to mean the garment covering his chest. Japheth b. Ali thinks Moses\u2019 arm became leprous as punishment for his doubting God. But, if so, it ought to have been the first sign, not the second. (Note that the first sign uses something that is in his hand, and the second uses his hand itself.) Jeshua b. Judah considers this sign a message to Israel, which was originally free, and then was afflicted by God with Egyptian slavery, that it would now be healed and return to freedom.
\nExodus 4:7
\nRASHI
\nWhen he took it out of his bosom, there it was again like the rest of his body. This shows that God makes good things happen more quickly than He does bad things. Moses\u2019 hand became leprous only when he took it out (v. 6), but it was healed already before it came \u201cout of his bosom,\u201d which is not found in v. 6.
\nExodus 4:8
\nRASHI
\nThey will believe the second. Literally, with OJPS, the \u201cvoice\u201d of the second sign. Once your \u201cvoice\u201d tells them, \u201cI was punished on your account, for slandering you,\u201d they will believe you. For they are already aware that those who conspire to do evil to them are punished by plagues, as Pharaoh (Gen. 12:17) and Abimelech were on account of Sarah.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIf they do not believe. We know that God knew whether they would believe or not. So this expression was simply to reassure Moses, who was afraid that some of the people would not believe the first sign. Or pay heed to the first sign. Literally, \u201cto the voice of the first sign.\u201d Of course the sign has no \u201cvoice,\u201d but the text is speaking in human language\u2014metaphorically.
\nExodus 4:9\u201310
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why would turning Nile water into blood (v. 9) convince the people if they had not already been convinced by the two previous, more miraculous signs?
\n\u2666 If belief of this kind is an inevitable consequence of the signs, as other biblical texts prove, how can God suggest that the Israelites might not believe two of the signs?
\nExodus 4:9
\nRASHI
\nWill turn to blood. The verse actually says \u201cwill turn\u201d twice. It seems to me that if the second \u201cwill turn\u201d had been omitted, the verse would have meant that the water would turn to blood right in Moses\u2019 hands and would already be blood as it fell to the ground. The second \u201cwill turn\u201d makes clear that the water would not turn to blood until it was on the ground.
\nRASHBAM
\nWill turn to blood. The Hebrew word translated \u201cwill turn\u201d is repeated in the verse (though not in the translations) for rhetorical reasons, as in \u201cThe ocean sounds, O Lord, the ocean sounds its thunder\u201d (Ps. 93:3) or \u201cHow long shall the wicked, O Lord, how long shall the wicked exult\u201d (Ps. 94:3).
\nIBN EZRA
\nIf they are not convinced. That is, if you think they are not convinced.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWill turn to blood. Rashi thinks the unusual syntax here is required to make clear that the water does not turn to blood until it hits the ground. But the Master is mistaken here. The grammarians have already shown that words are often repeated rhetorically or\u2014as here\u2014because there is a long intervening clause. See 1:15\u201316, Lev. 27:3, Deut. 18:6, Gen. 46:2, and many others.
\nExodus 4:10
\nRASHI
\nEither in times past or now. Moses says literally, \u201cAlso yesterday and also the day before and also now.\u201d This indicates that God made seven attempts to persuade Moses to take on the assignment. \u201cYesterday, the day before, now\u201d make three and \u201calso\u201d three times makes six. Now, on the seventh day, when God asked him again, he replied, \u201cMake someone else Your agent\u201d (v. 13), until finally God became angry at him and he agreed to do it. He only refused so many times because he did not want to be promoted over his brother Aaron, who was older than he and already a prophet. For when God told Eli the high priest, \u201cI revealed Myself to your father\u2019s house in Egypt when they were subject to the House of Pharaoh\u201d (1 Sam 2:27), this was a reference to Eli\u2019s ancestor Aaron. What Aaron prophesied is found in Ezekiel 20, which says, \u201cI made Myself known to them in the land of Egypt\u201d (v. 5). God told them there, \u201cCast away, every one of you, the detestable things that you are drawn to\u201d (Ezek. 20:7), and this was the prophecy transmitted through Aaron. Slow of speech. Literally, \u201cheavy of mouth,\u201d that is, a stutterer.
\nRASHBAM
\nI am slow of speech and slow of tongue. I am not fluent in the articulation of Egyptian. For I was a young man when I fled the country, and now I am 80 years old.\u2014We see in Ezek. 3:5\u20136 that \u201cslow of tongue\u201d describes one who is not fluent in the language of the realm. Could one possibly think that a prophet who knew God face to face, and received the Torah directly from His hand, was a stutterer? The idea that Moses stuttered is not found anywhere in rabbinic literature. Pay no attention to apocryphal books.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPlease. The commentators are unanimous in taking this word bi as \u201cplease.\u201d But Judah Halevi understands it literally: \u201cmine,\u201d as shorthand for the phrase \u201cLet the blame be mine, my lord\u201d (1 Sam. 25:24). That is, punish me however you want, but leave me alone and don\u2019t send me. I have never been a man of words. I am not a smooth talker, as one needs to be to speak before a king. And I have been this way since the day I was born. Now that you have spoken. OJPS \u201csince\u201d you have spoken is a better translation, for this is our clue that the entire prophecy from 3:1 to here did not take place on a single day. Slow of speech. By nature. And slow of tongue. In Egyptian, since he had not spoken it for many years.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nEither in times past or now that You have spoken to Your servant. Rashi takes this to mean that it took God seven days to persuade Moses to go. But the straightforward meaning is \u201cI was slow of speech in times past, since my youth; all the more so now that I am old. Even today, now that You have spoken to Your servant to ask me to go before Pharaoh to speak in Your name, you have not removed this impediment from me. How can I go before him like this?\u201d But Moses so wanted not to go that he did not pray to the Blessed One to remove his slowness of speech. He assumed he could get out of going because of his speech impediment. For surely the Lord of All could not send an emissary of uncircumcised lips to an emperor. Seeing that he had not prayed, the Holy One did not want to heal him, but merely told him, \u201cI will be with you as you speak and will instruct you what to say\u201d (v. 12). For the words that I will place in your mouth will be ones that you can pronounce properly. Exodus Rabbah says: \u201cGod told him: If you are not a man of words, don\u2019t worry. Isn\u2019t it I who created all the mouths in the world, and who made whomever I wanted dumb or deaf or seeing or blind? If I wanted you to be a man of words, you would! But here is what I want to do: When you speak, your words will be all right, for \u2018I will be with you as you speak.\u2019 \u201d According to this, it appears to me that He did not want to remove Moses\u2019 slowness of speech, because it resulted from the miracle that our Sages describe in Exodus Rabbah. I think that when God tells Moses \u201cWho gives man speech?\u201d in v. 11, He means, I could heal you. But since you don\u2019t want to be healed, and did not pray to Me for that, go do what I command you, and I will be with you when you speak and will make My mission successful. But it could also be that God\u2019s anger (v. 14) implies that He did not want to heal him, but sent him against his will.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses said. He was so eager to tell God he could not speak that he gave Him no chance to say, \u201cThey will believe the third sign\u201d (Abarbanel). Please. Rather, \u201cwith me\u201d\u2014do not perform the sign with my staff, but with me myself, and cure my speech defect (Abarbanel). Slow of speech and slow of tongue. The first expression may refer to a speech impediment, or, like the second, it may mean that he was not very good at putting words together. His inarticulateness was the result of his extreme concentration on divine matters (Gersonides). He had a harelip and could not pronounce the labials, b, p, m, and w (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 4:11\u201313
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 When God asks Moses \u201cWho gives man speech?\u201d (v. 11), one wonders: why doesn\u2019t God give speech to Moses?
\n\u2666 Why does God add the irrelevant \u201cdeaf, seeing or blind,\u201d which do not apply to Moses?
\n\u2666 Is \u201cGo, and I will be with you as you speak\u201d (v. 12) a response to Moses\u2019 implicit request or not?
\n\u2666 What does Moses mean by his reply, \u201cSend, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom Thou wilt send\u201d (v. 13, OJPS)?
\nExodus 4:11
\nRASHI
\nWho gives man speech? Who taught you what to say when you were on trial before Pharaoh for killing the Egyptian? Who makes him dumb or deaf, seeing or blind? Who made Pharaoh dumb so that he was powerless to give the order for your execution? Who made his servants deaf so that they could not hear the orders he gave about you? And the executioners, who made them blind so that they could not see when you fled the court and escaped? Was it not I whose Name is the Lord who did all this?
\nIBN EZRA
\nWho gives man speech? This goes with Who makes him dumb. Seeing and blind go together. But the word translated here as seeing really goes with deaf also, for it can be used of both senses, as is proved by Isaiah 42, Where it is used both with \u201ceyes\u201d (v. 7) and with \u201cears\u201d (v. 20).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWho makes him dumb? This translation is correct, as against the apparent literal meaning, \u201cWho puts dumbness in man?\u201d For dumbness is not a thing that could be put into man; rather it is an absence of speech. But because all human beings by virtue of their humanity have a \u201cspeaking soul\u201d\u2014that is, a rational intellect\u2014and mute people have an obstruction in their organs of speech, one might say that it is this obstruction that is \u201cput\u201d in them. Maimonides says (Guide 3:10) that one who removes something can be described as having created its absence\u2014as when one who puts out a candle is said to bring on darkness. This is how he interprets the verse \u201cI form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe\u201d (Isa. 45:7).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWho gives man speech? I could heal you; but I will look more impressive if I can make a stutterer perform My mission (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 4:12
\nIBN EZRA
\nI \u2026 will instruct you what to say. Notice that He does not say He will cure his speech impediment, as Moses expected\u2014merely that He will give him words to say that don\u2019t contain the sounds he finds difficult to pronounce.
\nExodus 4:13
\nRASHI
\nMake someone else Your agent. OJPS \u201cBy the hand of him whom Thou wilt send\u201d is closer to the Hebrew. He meant, By the hand of him whom you usually send\u2014Aaron. Another reading: By the hand of someone else whom you will eventually send anyway. For I am not the one who is going to end up bringing them into the land, nor the one who will ultimately redeem them. So you have many messengers at your disposal.
\nRASHBAM
\nMake someone else your agent. Less freely, \u201cBy the hand of him whom Thou wilt send\u201d (OJPS). By the hand of whomever you wish to send\u2014just not me.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMake someone else your agent. OJPS \u201cBy the hand of him whom Thou wilt send\u201d is more literal; it means, by the hand of him whom you always send to them\u2014Aaron. This is a clue that God had sent Aaron to Israel before Moses became a prophet; note that Eli the priest is told, \u201cLo, I revealed Myself to your father\u2019s house in Egypt when they were subject to the House of Pharaoh\u201d (1 Sam. 2:27). God\u2019s answer to Moses, mentioning Aaron, confirms this explanation. Notice that at first Moses did not turn down the job; he was hoping God would eliminate his speech defect. Once he saw that this was not going to happen, he could not understand why God did not simply send Aaron, who had no speech impediment.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMake someone else Your agent. See Rashi\u2019s comment. Onkelos translates, \u201cBy the hand of one who is fit to be sent\u201d\u2014that is, someone who speaks fluently and is suitable for such an honored assignment; not one who is slow of speech. Be with him when he speaks to Pharaoh! For it is not right for your messenger to be one with impeded speech. For the nations would not heed when he spoke before Pharaoh; they would consider it disrespectful. This is the interpretation of Onkelos. But I think it means \u201cby the hand of whomever You wish to send\u2014for there is no one in the world who would not be better suited for this mission than I.\u201d Now Moses\u2019 reason for such obstinacy was that he was \u201ca very humble man, more so than any other man on earth\u201d (Num. 12:3). For he did not dare aggrandize himself enough to tell the king, \u201cThe Lord sent me,\u201d nor to be sent to Israel to get them out of Egypt and become their king.
\nExodus 4:14\u201317
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 If God was angry at Moses for rejecting the assignment (v. 14), why did He agree to let Aaron speak for him and not simply give Aaron the job?
\n\u2666 What does God mean by saying (v. 16) that Moses will \u201cplay the role of God\u201d to Aaron?
\nExodus 4:14
\nRASHI
\nBecame angry. R. Joshua b. Korha says, Every time anger is mentioned in the Torah, it has some effect. But no effect is indicated in this case, nor is there any punishment as a result of this anger. R. Jose said to him, The effect of this anger is indicated in the words your brother Aaron the Levite. God is saying, \u201cI intended to make Aaron merely a Levite, and to have the priesthood descend from you, but now that is not how it will be. He will be the priest and you the Levite.\u201d So it is written: \u201cAs for Moses, the man of God, his sons were named after the tribe of Levi\u201d (1 Chron. 23:14)\u2014rather than becoming the priests that they had been intended to be. He is setting out to meet you on your way to Egypt. He will be happy to see you. And not, as you think, be angry that you have risen to greatness. And for this Aaron won the privilege of wearing the jeweled breastplate over his heart.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord became angry with Moses. This anger had its effect, according to the plain sense of the story, when \u201cthe Lord encountered him and sought to kill him\u201d (v. 24). I have explained this in more detail in my commentary to Gen. 32:29. He speaks readily. He grew to maturity there and is fluent in Egyptian.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord became angry. God forbid that anyone think this anger led to the attempt to kill Moses in v. 24. This would be reasonable if he had refused to go, but not once he did go. The Levite. Perhaps this had to be added because there were many Israelites named Aaron. For he speaks readily. And I will command him to set out to meet you. And don\u2019t think that he will be jealous of the fact that you are the messenger; he will be happy to see you.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHe, I know, speaks readily. That is, I know perfectly well that he will speak on your behalf of his own accord, out of love for you, whether or not I command him. Even now, of his own accord, he is setting out to meet you, and he will be happy to see you and will not be jealous of your stature at having been chosen for this honored mission. But God still had to tell Aaron, \u201cGo to meet Moses in the wilderness\u201d (v. 27), to let him know where to go. It would seem that Aaron heard that Moses was leaving Midian and set out to meet him and that on the way God told Aaron, \u201cGo to meet Moses in the wilderness,\u201d for that is where you will find him.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Lord became angry with Moses. As long as Moses gave a plausible reason for his words, God did not become angry. He became angry only when Moses said flatly: send someone else (Bekhor Shor). Maimonides (Guide 1:36) says the Creator never gets angry except with reference to idolatry, but this verse refutes him (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 4:15
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWith you \u2026 as you speak. To teach you what to say to Pharaoh. For at this point he does not tell Moses that Aaron will speak to Pharaoh for him\u2014only to the people (v. 16); but to Pharaoh, Moses will speak. This might have been for the purpose of giving honor to royalty. But eventually (in 6:30), Moses asks to get out of speaking to Pharaoh as well, and God gives him permission not to speak to Pharaoh. This was a promotion for Moses; thus in 7:1 God says, \u201cI place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet.\u201d With him. Although Aaron has no speech impediment, God will be \u201cwith him\u201d in order to make his words find favor in the ears of his listeners.
\nExodus 4:16
\nRASHI
\nHe shall serve as your spokesman. Since you have a speech impediment. The role of God. Master and ruler.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe role of God. Ruler and judge. What you command him, he will do.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSpeak for you to the people. From this verse we learn that Moses never spoke directly to the Israelites, only through Aaron. Once Aaron died, perhaps he was replaced by his son Eleazar.
\nExodus 4:17
\nIBN EZRA
\nThis rod. The one that had turned into a snake. If God has planted within your heart a heart of wisdom, you will understand about the burning bush, Moses\u2019 hand that turned leprous, the water that turns to blood, and also the rod that turned into a snake. The signs. So far, Moses has been told of only one sign that he will perform with the rod (the snake, v. 3). But it will eventually be used to turn into a serpent before Pharaoh (7:10) and for the plagues of blood (7:20), frogs (8:1), lice (8:12), hail (9:23), locusts (10:13), and darkness (10:22).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThis rod, with which you shall perform the signs. Up to this point, only a single sign has been connected with the rod, that of the snake. Thus it must mean, \u201cThe signs that I am going to command you to perform.\u201d But it seems to me that when God told Moses, \u201cwith various wonders that I will work upon them\u201d (3:20), He must have explained them to Moses in detail, but the text omitted them. These would be \u201cthe signs\u201d of our verse.
\nExodus 4:18\u201320
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Moses\u2019 request to Jethro (v. 18) seems to be internally inconsistent: \u201clet me return\u201d suggests he means to stay in Egypt for good, but \u201csee whether they be yet alive\u201d (OJPS) suggests only a visit.
\n\u2666 Why did God wait until v. 19 to tell Moses \u201call the men who sought to kill you are dead\u201d?
\nExodus 4:18
\nRASHI
\nMoses went back to his father-in-law Jether. For he had sworn to him not to leave without his permission. This father-in-law is given seven different names in the Bible: Reuel, Jether, Jethro, Kenite, Hobab, Heber, and Putiel.
\nRASHBAM
\nMoses went back from the wilderness to his father-in-law Jether.
\nIBN EZRA
\nJether. This is Jethro, just as Salmah in Ruth 4:20 is Salmon in v. 21. Let me go back to my kinsmen. But he did not reveal to him the encounter with God.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo in peace. This was not permission to go, but a prayer that Moses would survive a return to Egypt, where there was a price on his head. Hence God\u2019s reassurance in v. 19 (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 4:19
\nRASHI
\nThe men who sought to kill you. Who were they? Dathan and Abiram. In fact they were still alive, but they had lost all their property, and the poor man is considered as dead.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord said to Moses in Midian. Where he had settled after fleeing from Pharaoh (2:15). Now, in Midian, God told him: Return, for the Pharaoh who sought your life is dead, along with those who slandered you. For after Moses fled we were told, \u201cThe king of Egypt died\u201d (2:23).
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord said to Moses in Midian. The Torah is not arranged in chronological order; \u201csaid\u201d here means \u201chad said,\u201d and there are many such cases. He had said this to Moses before v. 18, where Moses asks Jether for permission to return to Egypt. Nonetheless, it was many days or even months after the angel appeared to him at the bush. The men who sought to kill you are dead. This is further explanation of \u201cthe king of Egypt died\u201d (2:23). That is, when the king of Egypt from whom Moses had fled died, all of his servants who had known Moses also had died. As long as that Pharaoh was still alive, Moses was not a suitable messenger. The Israelites had long been groaning and crying out to God; but now He sent Moses, who was \u201ctending the flock\u201d (3:1) and so forth. Moses could not return to Egypt until he was assured that those who knew he was wanted for murder were no longer alive.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord said to Moses in Midian. Ibn Ezra declares that the events in the Torah are not told in chronological order, and that it must read as \u201chad said.\u201d But his explanation is not correct. For God\u2019s original speech to Moses took place not in Midian, but at Mount Sinai. This is the only time that He spoke to Moses in Midian. But when Moses originally agreed to go, and went back to Midian to get permission from his father-in-law, he intended to go by himself, in disguise. Thus he says, \u201cLet me go back\u201d (v. 18)\u2014literally, \u201cLet me go and come back\u201d: it would just be like someone who desired to visit his relatives. It was at this point that God told him, Go back to Egypt, and do not be afraid, for all the men who sought to do you harm are dead. You will be there with the people until you bring them out of there. That is why Moses took his wife and children (v. 20), and it was a good plan to bring them, for the Israelites would trust him more on account of it. For being a free man in Midian, living in his own house with his wife and children, son-in-law to the priest of the country, he would certainly not bring them with him to Egypt to be slaves there and to embitter their lives with hard labor, unless he was absolutely convinced that they were going to get out of there in the immediate future. He planned to go up to the land of Canaan with them, and this way when he left Egypt, he would not have to go back to Midian to pick them up.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe men who sought to kill you. The relatives of the Egyptian you killed (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 4:20
\nRASHI
\nAn ass. Literally, \u201cthe ass,\u201d implying a particular one. It was the same ass that Abraham saddled for the binding of Isaac (Gen. 22:3), and that the King Messiah will one day appear on, \u201chumble, riding on an ass\u201d (Zech. 9:9). Went back to the land of Egypt \u2026 and took the rod of God. He took it before he left for Egypt; one must not read the text too literally when it comes to chronological sequence.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses took his wife and sons. Don\u2019t be surprised that Moses, the prophet, did not know God\u2019s hidden plan for the future. For in 2 Samuel 7, when David told Nathan the prophet that he wanted to build a temple for God, Nathan told him, \u201cthe Lord is with you.\u201d And afterward the prophet was told in a prophecy that David should not build the temple. Similarly, Moses took his wife and children to bring them to Egypt, which was not a good plan. For the Israelites would say, He can\u2019t have come to get us out of here if he brought his family with him. Mounted them on an ass. Eliezer and his mother. He was eight days old at the time. We don\u2019t know whether Gershom was born in Moses\u2019 youth or in his old age, but his second son, Eliezer, was born now as Moses\u2019 prophetic career was commencing. Pay no attention to The Chronicles of Moses, for everything written in it is worthless. The Septuagint translates \u201cass\u201d as \u201cbeast of burden,\u201d and Japheth, too, is embarrassed to have the prophet\u2019s family riding on an ass; but this is wrong. In Egypt, the ass was a more expensive and more respectable animal than the horse. As to how they could all ride a single ass: if Gershom was still little, he could have ridden behind Zipporah, and she carried baby Eliezer in her arms. Went back. \u201cHe returned\u201d (OJPS) is more precise, for Moses went to Egypt alone; after the events of vv. 24\u201326, Zipporah and the children went home to Midian. The rod of God. So called because of the sign he had performed with it. \u201cMoses\u2019 rod\u201d and \u201cAaron\u2019s rod\u201d mentioned later on are all this same rod.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMoses took his wife and sons. Better, his \u201cchildren\u201d\u2014for Num. 26:8 tells us that \u201cchildren\u201d can refer to a single child, and at this point Moses has only one son, Gershom (2:22). Zipporah only became pregnant with Eliezer on the journey, or perhaps in Egypt if she went there. Or it could be that when He spoke to him at the mountain of God he had only Gershom, but that Zipporah was pregnant, and gave birth when he \u201cwent back to his father-in-law Jether\u201d (v. 18). But because \u201cthe king\u2019s mission was urgent\u201d (1 Sam. 21:9), he did not circumcise him or name him before setting out to obey God\u2019s command. On the journey, when his mother circumcised him, she still did not name him, for Moses was having his confrontation with the angel. Only after Moses went to Egypt and saw that he was safe from all who had sought to kill him did he name him Eliezer, for \u201cthe God of my father was my help, and He delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh\u201d (18:4). Indeed, our Sages say that the one who was circumcised was Eliezer. Went back to the land of Egypt. He and his family. Ibn Ezra takes the singular verb to mean that Moses went to Egypt alone. When God \u201cencountered\u201d Moses (v. 24), Eliezer was circumcised, and when he was healed, Zipporah took the children home to her father. It could be that because Eliezer was circumcised, Moses could not bring him on the journey until the boy was strong enough, and he did not want to delay the Holy One\u2019s mission. So he left them at the encampment and told Zipporah to take them home to Midian once the boy was healed. This would explain \u201cafter she had been sent home\u201d (18:2). It is also possible that they all went to Egypt, and when they were detained there, she missed her father and Moses sent her home with the children. This would also explain \u201cafter she had been sent home.\u201d For Jethro was afraid that Moses intended to divorce her. In Exodus Rabbah \u201cMoses went\u201d (v. 18) is explained as follows: Where did Moses go? He went to get his wife and children. Jethro said to him, \u201cWhere are you taking them?\u201d \u201cTo Egypt.\u201d \u201cThe ones who are in Egypt want to get out, and you are taking your family in?\u201d \u201cThey are going to get out, and they will stand at Mount Sinai and hear, directly from the mouth of the Divine Power, \u2018I the Lord am your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt\u2019 (20:2). You don\u2019t want my children to hear it with them?\u201d Jethro said to Moses, \u201cGo in peace.\u201d If this is correct, then we must explain that after Moses and Jethro agreed that they would go to Egypt, God commanded Moses to carry out his plan, and to go back to Egypt with his wife and children, as I have explained.
\nExodus 4:21\u201323
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Isn\u2019t God\u2019s caution to Moses to make sure to perform the signs (v. 21) superfluous? That is the whole reason he is going to Egypt.
\n\u2666 Since God commands Moses to perform all the signs that He had given him, why does Moses not perform the second sign wen he goes back to Egypt?
\nExodus 4:21\u201323
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhen you return to Egypt. See the comment of Ibn Ezra, who understands the verse to mean: See that when you perform all the marvels that I have put within your power \u2026 he will nonetheless not let the people go until I kill his first-born son. But this explanation is not correct. What would be the point of telling Moses to \u201csee\u201d this while he was still in Midian? The correct explanation is that of the NJPS: when he took the rod of God in his hand to take the first step of the journey, God warned him, See that you perform before Pharaoh all the marvels that I have put within your power. Do not forget any of them. I, however, will stiffen his heart. But don\u2019t let this make you despair of performing the signs; and warn him again at the final plague, which will make him let them go. Within your power. In your power: you will perform them, and no one else.\u2014For God had already informed him that He would perform many signs and wonders (2:20). And all this was to encourage Moses. For because he was being compelled to go on this mission, God warned him about everything in advance, and then commanded him again when it was time to perform each and every wonder. It could be that you shall say to Pharaoh \u2026 now I will slay your first-born son is God informing Moses that He will eventually command him to say this to Pharaoh, at which point he will let them go. For Moses does not announce this to Pharaoh until the proper time; not everything that God tells him here is meant to be said to Pharaoh immediately. The verse may be read this way: See that you perform before Pharaoh as well all three of the marvels that I have put within your power to perform before the Israelites, so that Pharaoh will know that the elders of the people who are asking him to let them go are asking him at God\u2019s command, so he will not accuse them of lying about it. In fact Moses did perform the three signs before Pharaoh, although it is not written in the text. For when it says, \u201cWhen Pharaoh speaks to you and says, \u2018Produce your marvel,\u2019 \u201d (7:9), Moses was given a marvel specifically for that occasion. So he commanded the rod to turn into a serpent, rather than a snake as it had originally. He wanted to show Pharaoh that Aaron\u2019s rod could swallow up the rods of all the magicians, to show him that he could overcome them, and they would perish from the world at his hands. In Exodus Rabbah I have seen the following: \u201cWhat \u2018wonder\u2019 was he talking about? If you think it means the snake, the leprosy, and the blood, God gave him these marvels only for Israel, and we have not found that Moses performed these marvels for Pharaoh. So what are \u2018the marvels that I have put within your power\u2019? It is the rod, on which was written D\u2019TZAK ADASH B\u2019AHAB, the initials of the Ten Plagues.\u201d According to this interpretation, \u201csee\u201d is meant literally: \u201cSee the rod that I have placed in your hand? You shall perform all the marvels that are on it before Pharaoh.\u201d
\nExodus 4:21
\nRASHI
\nWhen you return to Egypt. Know that this is why you are returning: to bravely go on the mission for which I send you, to perform all the marvels before Pharaoh and not to be afraid of him. The marvels that I have put within your power. By these, God did not mean the three signs already mentioned, for those were meant to be performed before the Israelites so that they would believe him, not before Pharaoh. And in fact we never find that he performed these signs before Pharaoh. It means, The marvels that I am going to put within your power in Egypt, as in 7:9. Don\u2019t be surprised at the use of the past tense. It is really a future perfect: the marvels that I will have put within your power by the time you speak with him.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord said to Moses. God said this to him while he was still in Midian. He informed Moses that He intended to harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart so that he would not let them go on account of any of the plagues right up until the last one.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI \u2026 will stiffen his heart. This does not mean that God prevented Pharaoh from agreeing to let the Israelites go. It means that He strengthened Pharaoh enough so that he would not die of fear (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 4:22
\nRASHI
\nThen you shall say to Pharaoh. When? When you hear that his heart is hardened and he has refused to let them go, speak thus to him. My first-born son. It is an expression meant to indicate Israel\u2019s rank, as in \u201cI will appoint him first-born, highest of the kings of the earth\u201d (Ps. 89:28). This is its meaning in context. But the midrashic interpretation is that this is where God confirmed Jacob\u2019s acquisition of Esau\u2019s birthright.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMy first-born son. That is, the first nation that will serve Me. As Isa. 19:24\u201325 tells us, Egypt and Assyria too will one day serve God; but even though that passage calls Israel a \u201cthird partner,\u201d they will still remain His \u201cfirst-born,\u201d for their ancestors were the first to serve God.
\nExodus 4:23
\nRASHI
\nI have said to you on God\u2019s instructions, Let My son go.\u2026 Now I will slay your first-born son. This is the 10th plague, the slaying of the first-born, but God threatened him with it first because of its severity. This is what is said, \u201cSee, God is beyond reach in His power; who governs like Him?\u201d (Job 36:22). A man of flesh and blood who seeks revenge on someone conceals his intentions so that his target has no chance to escape. But the Holy One is \u201cbeyond reach in His power,\u201d and no one can escape from His hand except by returning to Him. Thus He teaches one and warns one to return and repent.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNow I will slay your first-born son. God revealed to Moses in advance the plague whose coming upon Egypt would permit the Israelites to leave, the last of the plagues. \u201cYour first-born son\u201d literally means Pharaoh\u2019s own first-born; see 12:29. \u201cI have told you time after time to let My people go; now I will punish you.\u201d Some clueless people think God is telling Moses that He will slay his first-born son, and think it leads into v. 24; but this is insane. Anyway, Eliezer was not Moses\u2019 first-born son.
\nExodus 4:24\u201325
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 What is the explanation for the episode (v. 24) where God tries to kill Moses?
\n\u2666 Why does Zipporah call Moses (v. 25) \u201ca bridegroom of blood\u201d?
\nExodus 4:24
\nRASHI
\nThe angel of the Lord encountered Moses and sought to kill him because he had not circumcised his son Eliezer. Because he did not bother to circumcise him, he was condemned to death. R. Jose said, \u201cGod forbid that he \u2018did not bother.\u2019 What he thought was: If I circumcise him and hit the road, the boy will be in danger for three days. If I circumcise him and wait three days, I will not be fulfilling God\u2019s command to leave for Egypt.\u201d Then why was he punished? Because once the journey was over, instead of immediately circumcising his son, he dealt with the arrangements at the lodging-place. (See B. Ned. 31b.) The angel was in the form of a kind of snake, and he swallowed Moses from the head to the loins, and then again from the feet to \u201cthat place.\u201d So Zipporah realized that it had to do with the circumcision.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord encountered him. The angel, as in 3:2. For he was taking his sweet time on the journey, having brought along his wife and children.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAt a night encampment on the way, the Lord encountered him and sought to kill him. Some say \u201chim\u201d refers to Moses\u2019 second son, Eliezer, and that the text does not name him because indeed he had not been named yet, as in Gen. 38:28, where \u201che [the as-yet-unnamed child] put out his hand.\u201d Here is what Moses did. He could not delay going on God\u2019s mission, even though Eliezer had just been born, but on account of the danger of travel, he did not circumcise him. He ought to have left him with his mother and gone to Egypt by himself. But in my opinion, \u201chim\u201d of \u201cthe Lord encountered him\u201d refers to Moses. For if it referred to Eliezer, it would have been Moses who circumcised the boy. But it would appear that the \u201cencounter\u201d was an illness that almost killed Moses, and made him tremble so much that Zipporah had to circumcise the boy.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nEncountered him and sought to kill him. Why such a great punishment for such a small sin? Because of Moses\u2019 great moral stature, as an example for others (Gersonides). That is, divine emanation reached him at a moment when (because of the journey) he was unprepared for prophecy, and thus endangered him (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 4:25
\nRASHI
\nTouched his legs with it. Rather, she tossed it at his\u2014Moses\u2019\u2014feet, saying about her son, You are truly a bridegroom of blood to me! You were almost the cause of my bridegroom being killed\u2014you are a husband-killer to me!
\nRASHBAM
\nA flint. A whetted blade, a sharp knife; it need not mean \u201cflint,\u201d but refers to a sharp object, as in \u201cYou have turned back the blade of his sword\u201d (Ps. 89:44). Cut off her son\u2019s foreskin. Performing the commandment of circumcision worked to save Moses as well as if it were a sacrifice of the kind Gideon (Judg. 6:19\u201322) and Manoah (Judg. 13:19\u201323) made when the angel appeared to them. His legs. Moses\u2019 legs\u2014hoping the angel would be satisfied with that. I would rather not interpret it to mean \u201cthe angel\u2019s legs,\u201d for who knows whether she saw the angel\u2019s legs. You are truly a bridegroom of blood to me! By this blood my bridegroom will remain mine. \u201cMy bridegroom\u201d = \u201cmy husband.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nFlint. Rather, \u201ca sharp object\u201d; see Josh. 5:2. God forbid that anyone should believe that Moses made an agreement with Zipporah (as one tradition says) that the first son should be his, and circumcised, and the second son Zipporah\u2019s, and uncircumcised. A prophet would never do any such thing, much less the prophet of all prophets. What happened was that God sent his messenger to remind Moses about the commandment of circumcision, and Moses sent his wife and sons home and did not bring them to Egypt. For we find in 18:6 that Jethro brings them to him in the wilderness of Sinai. Even in our own chapter, we find that the text says, \u201cHe returned to Egypt\u201d (v. 20)\u2014he alone. After this remark, the text goes back to recount what happened on the journey. Touched his legs. Some think this means Eliezer\u2019s legs. But to me it is more plausible that it means the legs of Moses. (When I discuss putting the blood on the doorposts in my comment to 12:7, I will hint at the use of blood as a ransom for life.) One who explains \u201che encountered him\u201d as also referring to Eliezer must then explain You are truly a bridegroom of blood to me as meaning that Eliezer was on the point of death. For women call the boy who is about to be circumcised \u201cbridegroom.\u201d When the illness left him, Zipporah said, \u201cYou are not a bridegroom of blood, but of the blood of circumcision\u201d (v. 26). But why would she have taken the risk of circumcising a boy who was already dying? In my opinion what she meant by calling her son a bridegroom of blood was,\u201d On account of you, my husband is going to die.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nFlint. For she did not have a knife or razor to hand (Abarbanel). Touched his legs with it. Rather, \u201cmade it (the blood) reach his legs.\u201d Zipporah was neither trained nor experienced in circumcision, and did not know how to stop the blood (Gersonides).
\nExodus 4:26\u201331
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does Zipporah add, when she repeats \u201cbridegroom of blood,\u201d \u201cbecause of the circumcision\u201d?
\n\u2666 What happens to Zipporah after this story, and why are we not told about it? She does not seem to be present after v. 26.
\nExodus 4:26
\nRASHI
\nWhen he let him alone. When the angel let Moses alone, Zipporah understood that he had come to kill him on account of the circumcision. She added, \u201cA bridegroom of blood because of the circumcision.\u201d My bridegroom would have been murdered on account of the circumcision. But Onkelos connects \u201cblood\u201d not with what precedes it, but with what follows: \u201cthe blood of the circumcision.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nThe angel let him alone. She added, \u201cA bridegroom of blood because of the circumcision.\u201d My husband must have been condemned to death on account of delaying the circumcision. For it is the circumcision that has saved him now.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe let him alone. The sickness and trembling left Moses. She added. Now you are a bridegroom of the blood of the circumcision, not \u201ca bridegroom of blood\u201d in the sense of one who is about to die.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBecause of the circumcision. When she called her husband a \u201cbridegroom of blood\u201d in v. 25, she assumed that Moses was not supposed to be married to her because he was a Hebrew and she was a Midianite. Now, after He let him alone, she realized it was because the circumcision had not been performed (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 4:27
\nRASHI
\nMet him at the mountain of God. He asked Moses, \u201cWho are these people?\u201d Moses replied, \u201cThis is my wife, whom I married in Midian, and these are my sons.\u201d \u201cWhere are you taking them?\u201d \u201cTo Egypt.\u201d \u201cWe\u2019re worried about the people who are already there, and you are bringing more?\u201d Moses told her, \u201cGo home to your father.\u201d So she took the children and went home.
\nRASHBAM
\nGo to meet Moses. To fulfill what the Holy One told Moses in v. 14, that Aaron was setting out to meet him.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGo to meet Moses. But He did not tell Aaron about going to Pharaoh, for it was Moses\u2019 prophetic mission to go to Pharaoh; Aaron was sent as prophet only to the Israelites, as Miriam was to the Israelite women (see Mic. 6:4). The mountain of God. Horeb.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord said to Aaron, \u201cGo to meet Moses in the wilderness.\u201d See my comment to v. 14. He \u2026 met him at the mountain of God. Mount Sinai, in between Midian and Egypt. He kissed him. Aaron kissed Moses. For the humble Moses treated his older brother with respect. That is why the text does not say, \u201cThey kissed each other.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe kissed him. Thus indicating his joy at seeing him, as God had promised (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 4:28
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAll the things that the Lord had committed to him. Moses told Aaron everything that had passed between him and the Holy One\u2014all about how he had tried to refuse the mission, and had been sent on it against his will. That is the meaning of \u201call.\u201d According to Song of Songs Rabbah, \u201cThe Sages say that Moses revealed the Ineffable Name to Aaron.\u201d They understood that he told him the names mentioned in vv. 13\u201315 by which he had been sent, as well as Adonai, the name that results from them, and interpreted them for him.
\nExodus 4:29
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe elders. It is the elders who guide Israel in every generation. Obviously Moses and Aaron could not speak with all 600,000 people.
\nExodus 4:30
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe performed the signs. The rod, and the sign of the leprous hand, and turning water from the Nile into blood on the ground. Aaron performed the first and third of these again on a different occasion, before Pharaoh.
\nExodus 4:31
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe people were convinced. The English punctuation here is misleading. It was not the signs that convinced them. The people were convinced when they heard that the Lord had taken note of the Israelites, that the time promised to Abraham for their rescue had arrived.
\nExodus 5:1\u20133
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since Pharaoh has already announced that he does not know the Lord (v. 2), why do Moses and Aaron again invoke \u201cthe God of the Hebrews\u201d (v. 3)?
\n\u2666 Why would Pharaoh care if the Lord should \u201cstrike us with pestilence or sword\u201d?
\nExodus 5:1
\nRASHI
\nAfterward Moses and Aaron went. But the elders (whom Moses was told in 3:18 to take with him) slipped away one by one from behind Moses and Aaron, until by the time they reached the palace they had all slipped away\u2014for they were afraid to go. And they got what they had coming to them at Sinai, when God told Moses to bring Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and the 70 elders up the mountain: \u201cMoses alone shall come near the Lord but the others shall not come near\u201d (24:2). God sent them back.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAfterward. After Aaron had performed the signs for the Israelites. The Lord, God of Israel. Since Pharaoh did not know the name \u201cLord,\u201d it was necessary to identify Him. \u201cIsrael\u201d here does not mean \u201cJacob,\u201d but the people of Israel. Celebrate a festival for me. Sacrifice to me. The root translated here as \u201ccelebrate\u201d refers to a sacrificial offering in 34:25 and Ps. 118:27. Some think this is a reference to the giving of the Torah, but that is midrash.
\nExodus 5:2
\nRASHBAM
\nWho is the Lord that I should heed Him and let Israel go? Why should I let Israel, who are my slaves, leave my land to serve Him? What right does He have to expect this people to serve Him?
\nIBN EZRA
\nWho is the Lord? As I have already informed you (in my comment to 3:15), Pharaoh was denying only that he knew the Tetragrammaton, which he had never heard before. It is to be understood as a straightforward question. The proof is that Moses gives it a straightforward answer: \u201cthe God of the Hebrews\u201d (v.3)
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI do not know the Lord, nor will I let Israel go. I do not believe in a Being who can create from absolute nothingness; and if I did, that would not make me let Israel go (Sforno).
\nExodus 5:3
\nRASHI
\nLest He strike us. What they meant was, \u201cLest He strike you.\u201d But they were treating the king with respect. \u201cStrike\u201d here implies a fatal blow.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe God of the Hebrews has manifested Himself to us. That is to say: The people of Israel came from the other side (eber) of the river to sojourn here. The Lord whom we mentioned is the God of the people from the other side of the river, so Israel is His people and must serve him lest He strike us with pestilence or sword.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Hebrews. The Egyptians were familiar with this term, which refers to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as I will explain in my comment to 21:2. Three days. As I explained in my comment to 3:12, Sinai is a three-day journey from Egypt. Lest He strike us with pestilence or sword. If he does this while we are in Egypt, we will all die, both we and you.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nLest He strike us. Rashi says they meant, \u201cLest He strike you.\u201d Ibn Ezra explains that \u201cus\u201d meant \u201call of us, Israelites and Egyptians.\u201d Thus when they saw the plague of the killing of the first-born, the Egyptians said, \u201cWe shall all be dead\u201d (12:33). For they had finally understood these words of Moses. Then they expelled the Israelites, to go and sacrifice. But what he says is wrong. For God did not command Moses and Aaron to tell Pharaoh that Israel would be struck by \u201cpestilence or sword\u201d if they did not sacrifice, and they did not alter their instructions from God by a single word. According to the Way of Truth, this expression refers to the underlying meaning of the sacrificial offerings, which serve as ransom from plague\u2014for \u201cPestilence marches before Him\u201d (Hab. 3:5)\u2014and from the \u201ccruel sword\u201d (Isa. 27:1). What they told Pharaoh here was in obedience to God\u2019s command in 3:18, \u201cyou shall say to him, \u2018The Lord, the God of the Hebrews, manifested Himself to us. Now therefore, let us go a distance of three days into the wilderness to sacrifice to the Lord our God.\u2019 \u201d They already said \u201cThus says the Lord, the God of Israel: Let My people go\u201d in v. 1. Now Pharaoh was a great sage, knowing God and acknowledging him, as we know from the fact that he (or his predecessor) told Joseph \u201cSince God has made all this known to you\u201d and called him \u201ca man in whom is the spirit of God\u201d (Gen. 41:39, 38). But he did not know the Ineffable Name that we render \u201cLord,\u201d and thus told Moses and Aaron, \u201cI do not know the Lord\u201d (v. 2). At which point they remembered to tell him, as they had been commanded, \u201cThe God of the Hebrews has manifested Himself to us,\u201d referring simply to \u201cthe God of the Hebrews\u201d (that is, God Almighty) rather than to \u201cthe Lord.\u201d \u201cManifested Himself to us\u201d is the language they were directly commanded in 3:18 to use. They further explained to Pharaoh that such a manifestation requires that sacrifice be performed, lest He strike them with pestilence or sword. Note that when God \u201cmanifests\u201d Himself to Balaam, the latter immediately makes clear that he has offered sacrifice (Num. 23:4).
\nExodus 5:4\u20137
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Pharaoh tell the taskmasters no longer to provide straw (v. 7)? Why didn\u2019t he just increase the quota of bricks?
\nExodus 5:4
\nRASHI
\nWhy do you distract the people from their tasks? Listening to you, they think they are going to be able to rest from their work. OJPS \u201ccause the people to break loose\u201d is closer to the Hebrew, which implies that they have caused the people to abandon their tasks. Get to your labors! That is, \u201cGet to the work that you, Moses and Aaron, have to do in your homes.\u201d But the tribe of Levi was not put to slave labor in Egypt, as you can see by the fact that Moses and Aaron come and go as they please.
\nRASHBAM
\nWhy do you distract the people from their tasks? OJPS is preferable; the verb implies removal or separation. The same root is used in \u201cthe priest shall bare the woman\u2019s head\u201d (Num. 5:18). Get to your labors! To your own work. Don\u2019t neglect your own business and at the same time cause others to neglect my work.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhy do you distract the people? The Hebrew word translated as \u201cdistract\u201d implies confusion: \u201cFor lack of vision a people lose restraint\u201d (Prov. 29:18). Get to your labors. Moses and Aaron are representative of Israel\u2014all of you, get to your labors.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMoses and Aaron. Pharaoh had asked their names, and called them by name as a mark of respect. Why do you distract the people from their tasks? Onkelos, following the usage of the verb in Prov. 1:25 and 13:18, translates, \u201ccause them to be idle from their tasks.\u201d Get to your labors! The straightforward sense is \u201cthe labors that you perform for the king.\u201d For they, too, were part of the people, and on this occasion they came before Pharaoh with the entire people. But he would not listen to them and commanded them all to return to work. Then Moses and Aaron came back before him, at which point Pharaoh said, \u201cProduce your marvel\u201d (7:9). Which they did, thus becoming, in his eyes, magicians and sorcerers and sages. So he treated them with respect. From the moment the plagues began, he feared them greatly. Moreover, it appears that the whole Israelite people did not work at brickmaking for Pharaoh every day. For they would have covered the land of Egypt with towns! Rather, they would work at forced labor for him. When he decided to make his yoke heavy upon them, he increased the number of laborers he took. Rashi explains \u201cyour labors\u201d to mean \u201cyour own labors,\u201d saying that the tribe of Levi was in fact not enslaved, and that Moses and Aaron were certainly free to come and go as they pleased. In fact, this is correct. For all kinds of work, both at home and in the field, is called \u201clabor.\u201d Just as every people has its own sages and teachers, so Pharaoh left the Israelites the tribe of Levi to be their sages and elders. It was all prearranged by God. In Exodus Rabbah I have seen: \u201cR. Joshua b. Levi said: The tribe of Levi was free of backbreaking work. Pharaoh said to them: Only because you are idle do you say, Let us go and sacrifice to our God. Get to your labors for Israel!\u201d Ibn Ezra explains the \u201clabors\u201d to mean Israel\u2019s labors, for he spoke to them as representatives of the people.
\nExodus 5:5
\nRASHI
\nThe people of the land on whom the work depends are already so numerous. And you are causing them all to rest from their labors without authorization. It is a great loss!
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe people of the land are already so numerous. This is Pharaoh\u2019s answer to \u201cLest He strike us\u201d (v. 3): Even if what you say is true, that pestilence or the sword should come, I am not worried. For the population is so great that plenty of them would be left even after the disaster.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSo numerous. Pharaoh meant: The quota of bricks was set when they were fewer, so their task is easier now; but you still have them on strike! (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 5:6
\nRASHI
\nTaskmasters. They were Egyptians. But the foremen were Israelites. One taskmaster was in charge of a number of foremen, and the foreman was in charge of controlling the people who actually did the work.
\nRASHBAM
\nTaskmasters. They were in charge of the foremen, as in \u201cmagistrates and officials\u201d (Deut. 16:18), where \u201cofficials\u201d is the same word translated in our verse as \u201cforemen.\u201d (Notice that OJPS uses \u201cofficers\u201d in both places.) The magistrates are in charge of the officials, and the officials are in control of the people, to make them do what the magistrates command.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe taskmasters and the foremen. The taskmasters were Egyptians and the foremen were Israelites.
\nExodus 5:7
\nRASHI
\nStraw. It would be mixed with the clay. Bricks. They are made of clay and dried in the sun, though sometimes they are oven-baked.
\nRASHBAM
\nStraw. They would mix straw with clay and make bricks of it.
\nIBN EZRA
\nStraw. Those who use earth as a building material customarily mix it with straw or chaff to strengthen it. Bricks. Brick buildings are stronger than those made either of earth alone or of stone. For buildings made of earth are vulnerable to water, and buildings made of stone are vulnerable to fire. But buildings made of brick are vulnerable to neither.
\nExodus 5:8\u201316
\nExodus 5:8
\nRASHI
\nThe same quota of bricks. The same quantity of bricks that each one made when straw was being supplied. Make them responsible for the same number now, in order to increase their workload. Shirkers. Etymologically, \u201cloose\u201d\u2014the work is \u201cloose\u201d in their hands and abandoned by them, and they are \u201cloose\u201d about it.
\nRASHBAM
\nThey are shirkers. And can really do more.
\nExodus 5:9
\nRASHI
\nNot pay attention to deceitful promises. Rather, \u201clet them not keep spouting hot air\u201d like \u201cLet us go and sacrifice.\u201d It cannot be \u201cpay attention to\u201d because biblical usage shows that the preposition to is required for that meaning, and (despite the NJPS) the preposition with is used here. As in other biblical examples, it means \u201cLet them not spend their time conversing with vain, empty words.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nPay attention. This is the correct translation. The same word is used in Gen. 4:4, \u201cThe Lord paid heed to Abel and his offering,\u201d and Isa. 7:18, \u201cThey shall not turn to the altars that their own hands made.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nNot pay attention to deceitful words. This translation follows Saadia. Still others understand the verb translated as \u201cpay attention\u201d to follow the usage in Isa. 17:7, \u201cMen shall turn to their Maker.\u201d Thus, \u201clet them not turn\u201d in reliance to God. But I think it means, \u201cLet them not malinger,\u201d as in Isa. 22:4, where the same word is used in the expression \u201cStay away from me.\u201d This meaning would follow well after \u201cshirkers\u201d in v. 8.
\nExodus 5:10
\nIBN EZRA
\nWent out. Of Pharaoh\u2019s palace, where the instructions of vv. 6\u20139 had been issued to the people who were at work.
\nExodus 5:11
\nRASHI
\nYou must go and get the straw yourselves. And you must do so with alacrity. For there shall be no decrease whatever in your work, no decrease from the quantity of bricks you used to make per day when you had straw at hand, given to you from the palace.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWherever you can find it. Whether near or far.
\nExodus 5:12
\nIBN EZRA
\nScattered. This is a transitive verb; it should be translated, \u201cHe scattered the people.\u201d And the scatterer was Pharaoh.
\nExodus 5:13
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe taskmasters pressed them, saying. That is, they pressed them by saying.
\nExodus 5:14
\nRASHI
\nThe foremen of the Israelites \u2026 were beaten. Since the foremen were themselves Israelites, they had too much compassion on their comrades to pressure them. When at the end of each day they would bring the bricks to the taskmasters, who were Egyptian, and the quotas were not met, the taskmasters would beat them for not pressuring the people who did the work. As a reward, these very foremen were made a Sanhedrin, and had some of the spirit that rested upon Moses drawn from him and put on them. This is clear from the verse where God tells Moses, \u201cGather for Me seventy of Israel\u2019s elders of whom you have experience as elders and officers of the people\u201d (Num. 11:16). \u201cOfficers\u201d is the same word translated here as \u201cforemen,\u201d and \u201cyour experience\u201d with them is the good deed that they did in Egypt. Before. Literally, \u201cthe day before yesterday.\u201d At that time they were still being supplied with straw, which they were not yesterday or today, when they could not meet the quota.
\nIBN EZRA
\nEither yesterday or today. These are to be taken literally\u2014\u201cyesterday,\u201d when the people did not do a full day\u2019s work because Moses performed the signs before them, \u201cor today,\u201d when Moses and Aaron went before Pharaoh.
\nExodus 5:15
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhy do you deal thus with your servants? It was not previously your custom to deal with us this way.
\nExodus 5:16
\nRASHI
\nThey\u2014the taskmasters\u2014demand of us: Make bricks! According to the original quota. The fault is with your own people. Grammatically this can only mean, This matter brings \u201cfault upon your own people.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nThe fault is with your own people. The grammatical form of the word translated \u201cfault\u201d demands the following interpretation of the phrase: \u201cWe are being beaten, and that is a sin your people [are committing against us].\u201d The vowels would have to be different for it to mean \u201cyour people\u2019s sin.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe fault. Not a noun, but an unusual verb form. It is to be translated, \u201cYour people will be at fault.\u201d They said it this way rather than \u201cYou will be at fault\u201d out of politeness.
\nExodus 5:17\u201322
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since God had already told Moses that Pharaoh would refuse his request, what happened to make him complain to God in vv. 22\u201323?
\nExodus 5:17
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe replied. Their words had no effect because of the hardening of his heart.
\nExodus 5:18
\nIBN EZRA
\nBe off now to your work! He told the foremen that now they, too, must work.
\nExodus 5:19
\nRASHI
\nFound themselves in trouble. Literally, \u201csaw them in trouble.\u201d \u201cThem\u201d is not \u201cthemselves\u201d (NJPS) or the taskmasters (OJPS), but their comrades, who were cruelly constrained by the authority of the foremen themselves. They saw their comrades in increasing trouble as a result of their increasing the workload by saying, \u201cYou must not reduce your daily quantity of bricks.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nFound themselves in trouble. With Pharaoh, who had told them to produce the same quota of bricks. Hence their complaint to Moses and Aaron in v. 21. NJPS is right to introduce a new paragraph here, and \u201cthemselves\u201d is also correct.
\nExodus 5:20
\nRASHI
\nThey\u2014some Israelites, not the foremen\u2014came upon Moses and Aaron. Our Sages interpret every occurrence of the words \u201cfighting\u201d (e.g., 2:13) or \u201cstanding\u201d as a reference to Dathan and Abiram, who \u201chad come out and stood at the entrance of their tents\u201d (Num. 16:27) at the time of Korah\u2019s rebellion.
\nExodus 5:21
\nIBN EZRA
\nMaking us loathsome. Literally, \u201cmade us stink in Pharaoh\u2019s eyes.\u201d As I have already informed you in my comment to Gen. 42:1, because all the senses are gathered together in a single place behind the forehead, the verb appropriate for one sense is often used for another, as in \u201cAll the people saw the thunder\u201d (20:15), or \u201cSee, the smell of my son\u201d (Gen. 27:27), or \u201cHow sweet is the light\u201d (Eccles. 11:7). The meaning is, as Ibn Janah explains, \u201cin the opinion of King Pharaoh and his servants, we have become like a bad odor that one cannot stand to smell.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nPutting a sword in their hands to slay us. They have long hated us and wanted to kill us; now you have given them the means and the excuse to do so (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 5:22
\nRASHI
\nWhy did You bring harm upon this people? And if You ask me what business it is of mine, my claim is that I have a right to ask because it happened on account of Your sending me.
\nRASHBAM
\nThen Moses returned to the place where the Lord had been speaking with him. Why did You bring harm upon this people? And if You say they have it coming to them because of the greatness of their sin, and they do not deserve to be redeemed, then Why did You send me? if they do not deserve to be redeemed and rescued.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhy did You bring harm upon this people? Moses here is passing on to God what the Israelites said to him. There are many similar occurrences. But God had already told Moses, \u201cI know that the king of Egypt will not let you go, not because of a mighty hand\u201d (3:19). That is, not because of one blow, or two, but only after I have performed wonders in his midst. But Moses was angry that God had not warned him such distress would come upon Israel in the meantime. He had expected that at least their burdens would be lightened a bit; he was totally unprepared for them to be increased, and had no reply when the foremen complained to him.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nLord. The Name is not written here, but literally the word \u201cLord.\u201d For the Name, which represents God\u2019s attribute of mercy, could not bring harm upon the people. Moses addresses God as \u201cLord\u201d twice previously, in 4:10 and 4:13. Either he was beseeching Him that He not get angry, or perhaps he was afraid to use the great Name, which he had only just learned, and to speak with that Name. Why did You bring harm upon this people? Since God had told Moses twice (3:19 and 4:21) that the king of Egypt would not let them go, why is he complaining? Ibn Ezra says that Moses thought that after they announced God\u2019s word to Pharaoh he would at least lighten up on the people a little, and that God would begin to rescue them. Moses was complaining because, instead, the opposite had happened. But I don\u2019t think this is correct. For v. 23 says, \u201cStill You have not delivered Your people.\u201d \u201cDelivering\u201d can only mean \u201cbringing them out of exile,\u201d not a mere lightening of their workload. In my opinion, our master Moses thought that God was telling him that Pharaoh would not heed them and let them go immediately at His command, or by a sign or a wonder, until he had performed all of His many marvels. But Moses thought that He would bring them upon Pharaoh right away, one after the other, within just a few days, and that when Pharaoh said, \u201cI do not know the Lord\u201d (v. 2), He would immediately command Moses to perform the miracle of the serpent. Then Pharaoh would not listen, and God would strike him with the plague of blood and subsequently all the others. But when Moses saw that things had stayed as they were for three days, with Pharaoh making things worse and worse each day, and that God did not rebuke him\u2014and he had received no revelation about what he should do\u2014then Moses thought, \u201cIt will be a long time\u201d (Jer. 29:28). And it may be that the story told by the text so far had actually taken many days. For when the foremen were beaten (v. 14), a number of days passed before they spoke with Pharaoh himself and asked him, \u201cWhy do you deal thus with your servants?\u201d (v. 15). For not just anyone can walk into the inner chamber of the palace of the king and speak with him face to face, much less these ethnic foremen whom he despised. They suffered their oppressive labor for many days and kept coming before the gate of the king until their cry was heard before the king and he commanded that they be brought before him to speak with him. It is also possible that Moses went back to God and asked \u201cWhy did you bring harm?\u201d a number of days after the foremen complained to him. Exodus Rabbah says: \u201c \u2018The taskmasters and foremen of the people went out\u2019 (v. 10). When the decree about the straw was issued, Moses went to Midian and spent six months there. Aaron remained in Egypt. That was when Moses brought his wife and children back to Midian.\u2026 \u2018They came upon Moses and Aaron\u2019 (v. 20). After six months, the Holy One revealed Himself to Moses in Midian and said to him, \u2018Go back to Egypt.\u2019 Moses came from Midian, and Aaron from Egypt, and the two of them met just as the foremen came out from before Pharaoh.\u201d I have further seen in Song of Songs Rabbah: \u201c \u2018My beloved is like a gazelle\u2019 (Song 2:9). Just as a gazelle appears and then vanishes, appears again and vanishes again, so their original redeemer appeared to them, vanished from them, and then reappeared to them.\u201d The point is that \u201ccoming upon\u201d someone implies an encounter after a long interval. There were many days between God\u2019s speaking to Moses and his coming before Pharaoh (three months, according to R. Tanhuma). So what Moses meant was, \u201cWhy did You bring harm upon this people by sending me so long before the end of the exile? You ought not to have sent me until You were ready to rescue them! Now, rather than rescuing them, You have done harm to them! If this is how You deal with them, they will be finished off by the harm that finds them.\u201d Thus God answered him, \u201cYou shall soon see what I will do to Pharaoh\u201d (6:1). For I will not stretch thins out as much as you think. \u201cHis hour is close at hand; his days will not be long\u201d (Isa. 13:22).
\nExodus 6:1
\nExodus 6:1
\nRASHI
\nYou shall soon see. You have criticized my behavior, unlike Abraham, to whom I said, \u201cit is through Isaac that offspring shall be continued for you\u201d (Gen. 21:12) and then, \u201coffer him as a burnt offering\u201d (Gen. 22:2), and yet he did not criticize My behavior. Well, then, You shall soon see. You shall see what happens soon\u2014to Pharaoh\u2014but you shall not see what happens to the kings of the seven nations of Canaan, after I bring the Israelites into the land. He shall let them go because of a greater might. Because My greater might will make him let them go. Because of a greater might he shall drive them from his land. Whether they want to go or not. They will not even have enough time to gather provisions.\u2014And in fact this is what happened: \u201cThe Egyptians urged the people on, impatient to have them leave the country\u201d (12:33).
\nRASHBAM
\nHe shall let them go because of a greater might. Rather, \u201cmake them go\u201d\u2014whether they want to go or not, he will eventually drive them from his land: \u201cThe Egyptians urged the people on, impatient to have them leave the country\u201d (12:33).
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou shall soon see. Pharaoh will begin to let up on them as soon as I begin the plagues. This is God\u2019s answer to \u201cStill You have not delivered Your people\u201d (5:23). Only afterwards does God answer Moses\u2019 earlier question, \u201cWhy did You send me?\u201d (5:22).
\nExodus 6:2\u20133
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God introduce Himself to Moses (v. 2) again?
\n\u2666 Why does He both \u201cspeak\u201d and \u201csay\u201d?
\n\u2666 If this \u201cGod\u201d was indeed the angel of 3:2, how can he say, \u201cI am the Lord\u201d?
\n\u2666 How can God say (v. 3) that the Patriarchs did not know Him as Lord, when Gen. 15:7 and many other verses testify that He spoke with them many times under that Name?
\nExodus 6:2
\nRASHI
\nGod spoke to Moses and said to him. He called him to account for his harsh question, \u201cWhy did You bring harm upon this people?\u201d (5:22). The Sages have explained: When Moses asked God, \u201cWhy did You bring harm upon this people?\u201d (5:22) the Holy One said to him: What a pity that the Patriarchs are no more! How I mourn their deaths! I appeared to them many times as El Shaddai, and they never asked Me, \u201cWhat is Your name?\u201d But you said to Me, \u201cWhen they ask me, \u2018What is His name?\u2019 what shall I say to them?\u201d (3:13). When Abraham wanted to bury Sarah, he could not even find a grave for her without paying cold cash for it (Genesis 23). Isaac faced contention over the wells that he dug (Gen. 26:18\u201320). Jacob, too, had to buy a piece of land to pitch his tent (Gen. 33:19). And not one of them questioned My behavior! Yet here you are saying, \u201cWhy did You bring harm upon this people?\u201d (5:22).\u2014But this midrash is not consistent with the biblical text, for a number of reasons. First, the text does not say, \u201cThey did not ask My name Lord.\u201d Second, He did indeed reveal that Name to Abram, at the covenant between the pieces: \u201cI am the Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to assign this land to you as a possession\u201d (Gen. 15:7). Third, in what way would it make sense to follow such a complaint by saying \u201cI have now heard the moaning of the Israelites\u201d (v. 5)? So I say the text is most coherent when interpreted in a way that works in context, \u201ca word fitly spoken\u201d (Prov. 25:11). Let the midrash be told anyway, as it says, \u201cBehold, My word is like fire\u2014declares the Lord\u2014and like a hammer that shatters rock!\u201d (Jer. 23:29)\u2014interpreting a verse is like a hammer striking rock: it creates many sparks. And said to him, I am the Lord. I faithfully reward those who follow Me. I did not send you for nothing, but to fulfill My promise to the Patriarchs.\u2014We find in a number of places that the expression \u201cI am the Lord\u201d indicates that God can be relied on, whether to punish (e.g., Lev. 19:12) or to reward (e.g., Lev. 22:31). I have heard something similar from R. Baruch b. Eliezer , who brought me a proof from the following verse: \u201cAssuredly, I will teach them, once and for all I will teach them My power and My might. And they shall learn that My name is Lord\u201d (Jer. 16:21). We learn from this that even when the Holy One fulfills words of retribution, He makes known that His name is Lord\u2014how much the more so when He is fulfilling a promise of reward.
\nRASHBAM
\nGod spoke to Moses. In Egypt. I am the Lord. And the definition of My name is that I have the power to keep My promise.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod spoke to Moses. The angel spoke to him, as agent of the Lord. I am the Lord. I have sent you to make known My honored name. For I did not make Myself known to the Patriarchs by it, as they deserved.\u2014Everyone acknowledged God (even Pharaoh, as I shall explain in my comments to 8:15), but not all even of the Israelites knew that the Lord was God. Thus God tells Moses \u201cI am the Lord\u201d to prepare him to tell the Israelites this in v. 6.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGod spoke. This expression appears only two other places in the entire Bible: \u201cGod spoke to Noah\u201d (Gen. 8:15) and, at the beginning of the Ten Commandments, \u201cGod spoke all these words\u201d (20:1) (Masorah). I am the Lord. I told you that you would be \u201cGod\u201d to Pharaoh, but don\u2019t misunderstand: I am the real God (Hizkuni). And as such I not only created the world, but keep it in existence (Sforno).
\nExodus 6:3
\nRASHI
\nI appeared to the Patriarchs as El Shaddai. I made a promise to each of them, and each time I told them, \u201cI am El Shaddai.\u201d But I did not make Myself known to them by My name \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. It does not say, \u201cI did not make this name known to them,\u201d but \u201cI did not make Myself known to them\u201d by that Name. That is, I did not make Myself known to them in My aspect of utter truthfulness and reliability, which is represented by the Tetragrammaton. For I made them these promises but did not fulfill them.
\nRASHBAM
\nAs El Shaddai. The revelation of this name was a promise for the future, which I have not yet kept. By My name \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. NJPS has moved this from its original place in the verse, and both English translations have added \u201cby,\u201d which is not in the Hebrew. It must rather be interpreted \u201cbut My name is YHWH.\u201d That is, I appeared to them as El Shaddai, but the essence of My name is YHWH. I did not make Myself known to them. This is a repetition of the previous statement: I did not reveal Myself to them as the essence of My name, but only as El Shaddai. But to you I have revealed the essence of My name\u2014Ehyeh\u2014and My appellation\u2014YHWH. And in your time I will fulfill My promise \u201cto give them the land of Canaan\u201d (v. 4). To repeat: the verse does not say (as it might have), \u201cMy name YHWH I did not make known to them.\u201d What it says is this: \u201cI appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as El Shaddai, but My name is YHWH. I did not make My self known to them.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nI appeared. In visions of the night. Shaddai. This is a difficult word to explain. R. Saadia understands it to mean sha-dai (\u201cthat [said] \u2018enough\u2019 [to the world]\u201d). But I do not see how \u201cthat enough\u201d can be a name. Rather, \u201cShaddai\u201d must be an adjective; it has the same vowel pattern as davvai (\u201csick\u201d) in Jer. 8:18. Samuel ha-Nagid derives it from \u05e9\u05d3\u05d3, \u201cto destroy,\u201d taking it to mean \u201cstrong and victorious,\u201d and this explains it well. But I did not make Myself known \u2026 by My name \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. Ibn Janah, following the Hebrew word order (see OJPS), interprets it as an oath: \u201cBy My name YHWH! I did not make Myself known to them as I have to you.\u201d The word \u201cbut,\u201d however, cannot be interpreted as introducing an oath in Hebrew, as it does in Arabic. Grammatically, the \u201cas\u201d of \u201cas El Shaddai\u201d applies to \u201cMy name YHWH\u201d as well (see the translations, where it is translated as \u201cby\u201d the second time). Saadia explains it to mean that the Patriarchs knew God as El Shaddai, and not only as YHWH. But there is no need for this nicety, since we know that YHWH and El Shaddai are one and the same, and there is no distinction between them, except that Shaddai is always descriptive and YHWH is sometimes descriptive and sometimes a proper noun, as I have pointed out in my note to 3:15. After all, God explicitly tells Abram, \u201cI am the Lord who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans\u201d (Gen. 15:7), and tells Jacob, \u201cI am the Lord, the God of your father Abraham and the God of Isaac\u201d (Gen. 28:13). Jeshua b. Judah thinks that the Patriarchs did not know the Tetragrammaton, which was put into their stories by Moses when he wrote the Torah. But this is incorrect. How could Moses do this and subsequently write that the Patriarchs did not know the Tetragrammaton? There is no doubt that the Patriarchs knew this name. They merely did not know that this name, like Shaddai, was descriptive as well as being a name. And now I will reveal to you something of the mystery of \u201cEl Shaddai.\u201d We know that there is an intermediary world between the upper world of the Lord and our lower world. Because the natural place of the human soul is above the intermediary world, if it is wise enough to abandon the pleasures of the lower world and cleave to God, God can extricate it from the fate determined for it astrologically in the intermediary world of the stars. Thus God tells Abram, \u201cI am El Shaddai.\u2026 I will make you exceedingly numerous\u201d (Gen. 17:1\u20132), overcoming the childlessness that had been determined for him astrologically. \u201cThe Angel who has redeemed me from all harm\u201d (Gen. 48:16) of whom Jacob spoke played a similar role. As I shall explain in my comments to 20:1 and 33:23, cleaving to God in order to overcome one\u2019s predetermined fate is the mystery underlying the entire Torah. The Patriarchs did not achieve this cleaving to God to the same degree as did Moses, who knew God face to face. This is what enabled Moses to alter the course of nature and perform miracles, which the Patriarchs could not do. In context, \u201cI am the Lord\u201d is the answer to Moses\u2019 question of 5:22, \u201cWhy did You send me?\u201d\u2014\u201cI sent you to make this name known throughout the world, just as I sent the Patriarchs to make known My name El Shaddai.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nBut I did not make Myself known to them by My name \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. See Rashi\u2019s comment. What he meant by it is that the fulfillment of the promise had not yet been made known. For the time of fulfillment of the promise had not yet arrived in any case. But his explanation would require changing the verb so that the verse would read either \u201cI did not make known to them My name YHWH\u201d or \u201cMy name YHWH was not known to them.\u201d Perhaps he understood the phrase to mean (following the Hebrew word order reflected in OJPS), \u201cMy name is YHWH, but I did not make Myself known to them\u201d by that name. The English translations follow Ibn Ezra. What the text really means is that God appeared to the Patriarchs as El Shaddai, the name by which He can overcome astrological forces and perform miracles that are great but do not upset the natural order of things. \u201cIn famine He redeemed them from death, in war, from the sword\u201d (Job 5:20). He gave them wealth, honor, and every good thing. They were like all the assurances in the Torah with regard to blessings and curses. For reward for observing the commandments and punishment for transgressions both come through miraculous means. For if man was left to his nature, or to his astrological fate, his deeds would neither help nor hurt him. But in this world, reward and punishment for everything commanded in the Torah is miraculous but hidden. A neutral observer would see them as natural events, when in truth they are the man\u2019s reward or punishment. That is why the Torah goes on at length about the promises that apply to this world, but does not explain the spiritual promises that apply to the world of souls. For the promises that apply to this world are in fact supernatural, but the survival of the soul and its cleaving to God are natural, since by rights it should \u201creturn to God Who bestowed it\u201d (Eccles. 12:7). I will say more about this later, with God\u2019s help.
\nGod, then, told Moses: I showed Myself to the Patriarchs in the power by which I manipulate the constellations and help my chosen ones. But by My name YHWH\u2014the name by which all that exists has its being\u2014I did not make Myself known to them. That is, I did not alter nature and create new things for them. \u201cSay, therefore, to the Israelite people: I am the Lord\u201d (v. 6). Inform them once more of the great Name, for by it I will work wonders for them. Let them know that \u201cI the Lord do all these things\u201d (Isa. 45:7). And everything that Ibn Ezra said on this topic is correct. But he is like one who prophesies without realizing what he is saying. For he has not explained the change from \u201cappeared\u201d to \u201cmake known.\u201d He could explain this as follows: God specifically says I appeared to the Patriarchs because their prophecy was all received in night visions. But that of Moses was received face to face. So I did not make Myself known to them as I have to you.
\nThe True meaning of this text is what it literally says in context: I appeared to them through the lens of El Shaddai, following what God says in Num. 12:6, \u201cWhen a prophet of the Lord arises among you, I make Myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream.\u201d But I did not make Myself known to them, for they did not look through the clear glass to be able to know Me like Moses, the one \u201cwhom the Lord singled out, face to face\u201d (Deut. 34:10). The Patriarchs knew YHWH, but not through prophecy. So when Abraham spoke with God, he would use the word \u201cLord\u201d (e.g., Gen. 18:32) or the combination \u201cLord god\u201d (e.g., Gen. 15:2), not the Tetragrammaton alone.
\nWhat it means is that the Shekhinah was revealed to the Patriarchs, and there was divine speech with them through a weakened form of God\u2019s attribute of justice, and that is how He dealt with them. But He dealt with Moses, and was known to him, through His attribute of mercy, which is indicated by His great Name, the Tetragrammaton\u2014as Isaiah says, \u201cWho made His glorious arm march at the right hand of Moses \u2026 Thus did You shepherd Your people to win for Yourself a glorious name\u201d (Isa. 63:12, 14). Therefore Moses does not use the name El Shaddai in the Torah from this point on, for the Torah was given through His great Name\u2014\u201cI the Lord am your God\u201d (20:2). \u201cFrom the heavens He let you hear His voice to discipline you; on earth He let you see His great fire\u201d (Deut. 4:36). I have already hinted at the meaning of \u201cthe heavens.\u201d May the Holy One open our eyes and show us wonders from His Torah.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nShaddai. Saadia is correct that the name means \u201cthe one [who said] \u2018Enough\u2019 [to the world].\u201d The use of the relative pronoun sha- is comparable to that of asher in Ehyeh-Asher-Ehyeh (3:14). The name may refer to God\u2019s telling the heavens at the beginning of creation that they had spread far enough and\/or to His own existence being sufficient (Abarbanel). My name \u05d9\u05d4\u05d5\u05d4. \u201cI appeared \u2026 as El Shaddai, and My name YHWH.\u201d Note that the cantillation marks suggest a separation between this phrase and the following phrase, I did not make Myself known to them (Bekhor Shor). To them\u2014to Israel. God\u2019s name is His self, and His self is His name (Gersonides). But I must make it known to the Israelites before they can become My people (Sforno).
\nExodus 6:4
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How are the establishing of the covenant (v. 4) and hearing the moaning of the Israelites (v. 5) connected with God\u2019s Name?
\nExodus 6:4
\nRASHI
\nI also established My covenant with them. Even though I appeared to them as El Shaddai, I also made a covenant between Myself and them to give them the land of Canaan. To Abraham, in the passage that establishes the covenant of circumcision: \u201cWhen Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to Abram and said to him, \u2018I am El Shaddai. Walk in My ways and be blameless.\u2026 I assign the land you sojourn in to you and your offspring to come, all the land of Canaan, as an everlasting holding. I will be their God\u2019 \u201d (Gen. 17:1, 8). To Isaac: \u201cReside in this land, and I will be with you and bless you; I will assign all these lands to you and to your heirs, fulfilling the oath that I swore to your father Abraham\u201d (Gen. 26:3). And the same oath I swore to Abraham as El Shaddai, I swore to Jacob: \u201cI am El Shaddai. Be fertile and increase; a nation, yea an assembly of nations, shall descend from you. Kings shall issue from your loins. The land that I assigned to Abraham and Isaac I assign to you; and to your offspring to come will I assign the land\u201d (Gen. 35:11\u201312). So you see, I made a vow to them that I have not yet fulfilled.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI also established My covenant. I have also sent you because I swore to give them\u2014or to their offspring, who are considered like them\u2014the land of Canaan.
\nExodus 6:4\u20135
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI also established My covenant with them. That is, I appeared to them as El Shaddai and also established for them this covenant with Me. And I have now, as YHWH, heard the moaning of the Israelites \u2026 and I have remembered My covenant that I established with them. A word to the wise is sufficient. Now with regard to the midrash quoted by Rashi (in his comment to v. 2) about the Patriarchs never questioning His behavior or asking Him for His name: In fact, this midrash is quite consistent with the biblical text. The difficulty that prompted the Sages to create this midrash is the idea that the text would introduce a comment about the prophetic level of the Patriarchs only to belittle them and to say that God appeared to them \u201conly\u201d as El Shaddai. What would be the point of this? This text could just as well have begun with v. 6. So the Sages interpret vv. 2\u20135 as reproof to Moses, to tell him, \u201cThe Patriarchs, whose level of prophecy did not approach yours, and who knew Me only as El Shaddai, believed Me. I established My covenant with them, and I heard the moaning of their children on their account. But you, who know Me by My great Name, by which I made My promise to you, how much the more should you rely on My mercy, and promise the Israelites in My name that I will work signs and wonders with them.\u201d This too is reasonable and correct.
\nExodus 6:5
\nRASHI
\nI have now\u2014being obligated to fulfill the covenant I established\u2014heard the moaning of the Israelites who are moaning because the Egyptians are holding them in bondage, and I have remembered that same covenant. For at the covenant between the pieces I told Abram, \u201cI will execute judgment on the nation they shall serve\u201d (Gen. 15:14).
\nIBN EZRA
\nI have now heard the moaning of the Israelites. Indicating that they have repented; this is still another reason why I have sent you.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI have now heard the moaning of the Israelites. Even before My name was known to them. Even then I tried to extend My providence to them and fulfill My covenant with them. How much the more are they worthy of My providence now that My name is known to them! (Gersonides).
\nExodus 6:6\u20137
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why the triple description\u2014\u201cfree,\u201d \u201cdeliver,\u201d and \u201credeem\u201d\u2014of the same thing (v. 6)?
\n\u2666 How does what was said previously lead \u201ctherefore\u201d to this redemption?
\nExodus 6:6
\nRASHI
\nSay, therefore, in accordance with that oath, to the Israelite people: I am the Lord. Use the Name that indicates that my promise is reliable. I will free you. For that is what I promised: \u201cIn the end they shall go free with great wealth\u201d (Gen. 15:14). The labors of the Egyptians. Literally, from \u201cunder\u201d the labors of the Egyptians\u2014that is, their burdens, both literally and figuratively.
\nIBN EZRA
\nTherefore. Just as I remain in existence, so does My word. An outstretched arm. Outstretched from heaven to earth.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will free you from the labors of the Egyptians. He promises them that He will bring them out of the Egyptians\u2019 land so that they need no longer bear their heavy burdens. Deliver you from their bondage. They will be completely out from under the Egyptians\u2019 control, not owing them any tribute. I will redeem you. He will perform extraordinary chastisements on the Egyptians until they say, \u201cGo, Israel, as a ransom for our lives!\u201d For \u201credemption\u201d implies a monetary transaction. With an outstretched arm. His arm will be stretched out over them until He brings them out.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSay, therefore. For these three reasons: because I wish to take them for My people, because I made a covenant with their ancestors, and because I have heard their moaning (Sforno). I will free you from the labors of the Egyptians. From the day the plagues begin, your servitude will be lightened (Sforno). Extraordinary chastisements. Pharaoh would have let them go immediately had I wished him to: \u201cLike channeled water is the mind of the king in the Lord\u2019s hand; He directs it to whatever He wishes\u201d (Prov. 21:1). But I wish to revenge Myself on him for enslaving them (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 6:7
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will take you to be My people. When you accept the Torah at Mount Sinai. Your God who freed you. Though their astrological fate at that point was to remain in exile, as I shall explain in my comments to 33:21.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will take you to be My people. When you come to Mount Sinai and accept the Torah, \u201cyou shall be My treasured possession\u201d (19:5). You shall know that I, the Lord, am your God who freed you from the labors of the Egyptians. According to Ibn Ezra, the conjunction of Israel\u2019s stars decreed that they should remain in exile. But that is not the intent of this section, which merely says: When I redeem you with an outstretched arm that all the nations see, you will know that I am the Lord who creates new wonders in the world, and I am your God and have done all this for you, for you are \u201cthe LORD\u2019s portion\u201d (Deut. 32:9).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI will take you to be My people. Better that you be slaves to Me than to Pharaoh (Bekhor Shor). I, the Lord, am your God who freed you. And you will serve me willingly, saying, \u201cBetter to serve the Great King than a commoner like that Pharaoh!\u201d (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 6:8\u201312
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 What sense is there in Moses\u2019 syllogism (v. 12)? The Israelites would not listen to him because their spirits were crushed (v. 9), but this was not true of Pharaoh!
\nExodus 6:8
\nRASHI
\nI swore. With OJPS, \u201cI lifted up My hand\u201d\u2014to swear by My throne.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI swore. NJPS understands the more literal \u201cI lifted up My hand\u201d (OJPS) correctly as a metaphor; see \u201cLo, I raise My hand to heaven\u201d (Deut. 32:40) and \u201cHe lifted his right hand and his left hand to heaven\u201d (Dan. 12:7). I will bring you into the land. That is, you or your children. Some say it was a conditional promise, but this is unnecessary. For many of those who left Egypt were under 20 years old and did enter the land, along with the children of those who died in the wilderness. For only those 20 or older were condemned to die in the wilderness.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI swore. Rashi takes the literal \u201cI lifted up My hand\u201d to indicate that God is putting His hand on His throne; Ibn Ezra, citing Deut. 32:40 and Dan. 12:7, takes it as metaphoric. But the True meaning is, \u201cI have lifted up My hand of power to Myself that I will give you the land.\u201d But the Daniel verse cited by Ibn Ezra has nothing to do with this topic; it refers not to God but to the angel \u201cclothed in linen,\u201d who swears by \u201cthe Ever-Living One.\u201d
\nExodus 6:9
\nRASHI
\nThey would not listen to Moses. They took no consolation from what he said. Their spirits crushed. One\u2019s spirit is one\u2019s \u201cwind.\u201d One who is in distress is short of breath, and can hardly draw his lungs full of air.
\nRASHBAM
\nThey would not listen to Moses. They would not listen to him now, even though earlier \u201cthe people were convinced\u201d (4:31). For they had expected to get some rest from their hard labor, but now the work was harder than ever.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey would not listen. It is not that they would not believe him, but that they literally would not listen, their spirits crushed by the length of the exile and by the increasingly cruel bondage that had been imposed on them.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nTheir spirits crushed. Not that they did not believe in God or his prophet, but that they would not listen because their spirits were crushed, like that of a man so crushed by his toil that he does not want to live an extra minute in pain, even though he knows that he will eventually get some relief. What crushed their spirits was the fear that Pharaoh would kill them, as the foremen told Moses (5:21). Cruel bondage. This refers to the pressure the taskmasters were putting on them (5:13), not giving them a moment to think.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses told this to the Israelites. Without Aaron\u2019s help, as commanded in v. 6 (Gersonides). They would not listen to Moses. For which reason the promise of v. 8, \u201cI will bring you into the land,\u201d was fulfilled not for them, but for their children (Sforno). Their spirits crushed. Rather, with Ps. 78:8, their \u201cspirit was not true to God\u201d because the cruel bondage prevented them from thinking about what Moses had said (Sforno).
\nExodus 6:10
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord spoke to Moses, saying. To him.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord spoke to Moses, saying. The commentators have said that throughout the Torah this word \u201csaying\u201d\u2014literally, \u201cto say\u201d\u2014always indicates something that is to be said to the Israelites. But here it is something to be said to Pharaoh. In Gen. 31:29, it introduces something that is not to be said at all! Moreover, in many places the speech to Israel is made explicit anyway (e.g., 7:8\u20139, Lev. 18:1\u20132, Num. 15:37\u201338, Deut. 1:9). In 7:9, \u201cWhen Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, \u2018Show a wonder for you,\u2019 \u201d it cannot mean \u201csaying to someone else.\u201d In my opinion the word is always used to indicate a full, clear, complete expression\u2014not a doubtful or allusive one. This explains why it is so common in the Torah, for God spoke with Moses \u201cmouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles\u201d (Num. 12:8).
\nExodus 6:11
\nIBN EZRA
\nGo. To the palace.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo and tell Pharaoh. Without Aaron\u2019s help\u2014prompting Moses\u2019 appeal in v. 12 (Gersonides).
\nExodus 6:12
\nRASHI
\nHow then should Pharaoh heed me? This one of the 10 biblical examples of the inference a fortiori. Impeded speech. Literally, with OJPS, \u201cuncircumcised lips.\u201d That is, \u201cobstructed lips,\u201d for I say that \u201cuncircumcised\u201d always means \u201cobstructed.\u201d Thus in Jer. 6:10, \u201ctheir ears are blocked\u201d is literally \u201ctheir ears are uncircumcised\u201d; in Jer. 9:25, \u201cuncircumcised of heart\u201d means \u201cblocked from understanding,\u201d just as with the uncircumcised male member, where the foreskin blocks and covers it.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Israelites, who are Your people, would not listen to me; how then should Pharaoh, who is not one of Your people, heed me? A man of impeded speech. Some think that \u201cI will be with you \u2026 as you speak\u201d (4:15) means that God removed Moses\u2019 speech impediment. But this proves that He had done so only temporarily, or that He prompted Moses to speak in such a way that he would not have to pronounce the sounds that were difficult for him.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Israelites would not listen to me. Because you did not make my words ones they could listen to. How then should Pharaoh heed me? Moreover, I am a man of impeded speech and not fit to speak before a great king. This could be interpreted to mean that Moses thought the Israelites would not listen to him because of his deficiency, because he was a man of impeded speech and could not formulate consoling words to speak to their hearts. How then could he speak to Pharaoh? The reason for Moses\u2019 insistence is that originally (3:18) God did not instruct him to speak to Pharaoh, merely to go to Pharaoh with the elders, and that they would all speak to Pharaoh. Moses must have assumed that the elders would speak, and he could remain silent. His complaint that he was not \u201ca man of words\u201d (4:10) was because he was embarrassed even to speak to the people. God assured him that Aaron would do his talking to the people, which is indeed what happened at first (4:30). But here in v. 6 Moses himself is commanded to speak to the people\u2014but they would not listen to him. Now, being commanded to speak to Pharaoh as well, he repeats that he is \u201ca man of impeded speech.\u201d \u201cSo the Lord spoke to both Moses and Aaron in regard to the Israelites\u201d\u2014to tell them all He would command\u2014\u201cand Pharaoh\u201d\u2014to let them go (v. 13). Rashi and NJPS do not make this clear.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Israelites would not listen to me. Moses did not realize that they did not listen because their spirits had been crushed (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 6:13\u201314
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 What new information is added by v. 13, which seems merely to repeat what we already know?
\n\u2666 Why are the genealogies of Reuben, Simeon, and Levi given (vv. 14\u201325), but not those of the other tribes?
\nExodus 6:13
\nRASHI
\nThe Lord spoke to both Moses and Aaron. Since Moses had described himself as being \u201ca man of impeded speech\u201d (v. 12), God assigned Aaron to him as his spokesman. In regard to the Israelites, they were instructed to lead them sensitively and to put up with them, and in regard to Pharaoh king of Egypt, they were instructed to speak respectfully to him. So the midrash has it. But contextually it is as the translations have it. As far as the contents of the instruction, they are to be found in ch. 7, after the material inserted to give the lineage of Moses and Aaron.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord spoke to both Moses and Aaron in regard to the Israelites. Jeshua b. Judah thinks this means that He told them not to lose their tempers with the Israelites, whose spirits were crushed. But this interpretation is unnecessary. Aaron is included here as Moses\u2019 spokesman.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nIn regard to the Israelites. Rashi points out that the contents of the instruction are found in ch. 7, after the genealogy, like someone saying, \u201cBut now let us return to our previous subject.\u201d Ibn Ezra is of the same opinion. But I do not share this opinion. Once Moses had spoken to the Israelites per God\u2019s command (v. 6) and they had not listened to him, God commanded both him and Aaron to speak to both the people and to Pharaoh. Moses assumed that both of them would be present on every occasion, for every speech and every marvel, and that only one of them would have to talk. This is how it works when there is a two-man delegation. One speaks and the other remains silent. Moses was willing to go along with this. Now God tells Moses a second time, \u201cI am the Lord\u201d (v. 29) who appeared to you alone, commanding you to speak in My great Name, \u201cSpeak to Pharaoh king of Egypt all that I will tell you.\u201d For all My utterances will come to you, not to Aaron with you. It is you whom I have made My messenger to Pharaoh. At this point Moses objects again that he is a man of \u201cimpeded speech\u201d (v. 30), and God tells him, \u201cI place you in the role of God to Pharaoh, with your brother Aaron as your prophet\u201d (7:1). You will go before Pharaoh and command Aaron, but Pharaoh will not hear your words. Aaron, on assignment from you, will utter your words, just as God commands a prophet and the prophet utters His words and reproves the people with them.\u2014This was a promotion for Moses, which he earned by his great humility in being embarrassed to speak because of his impeded speech. Note that eventually \u201cMoses himself was much esteemed in the land of Egypt, among Pharaoh\u2019s courtiers and among the people\u201d (11:3). Measure for measure\u2014he had been afraid that they would despise him. And see my comment to 7:2.
\nExodus 6:14
\nRASHI
\nThe following are the heads of their respective clans. Needing to give the genealogy of Levi for the sake of Moses and Aaron, the text begins by showing how they are related to Reuben. In Pesikta Rabbati I have seen the following: \u201cBecause our father Jacob reproached these three tribes on his deathbed (Reuben, Gen. 49:3\u20134; Simeon and Levi, Gen. 49:5\u20137), the text gives their genealogies again here by themselves to show that they are worthy of regard.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nThe following are the heads of their respective clans. The Mekilta explains that the text gives the genealogy of these three tribes, whom Jacob disparaged in his testament in Genesis 49, to make clear that they are nonetheless worthy of regard. But the contextual reason was to give the lineage as far as Moses and Aaron, who are in the story at this point, and as far as Korah and the sons of Uzziel, who will be in the story later in the Torah.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe heads of their respective clans. Rather, with OJPS, \u201cthe heads of their [Moses\u2019 and Aaron\u2019s] fathers\u2019 houses.\u201d Or perhaps \u201ctheir\u201d refers to \u201cthe Israelites\u201d in v. 13. The list is taken from Gen. 46:9\u201311, giving Reuben, who had lost the birthright, at least the honor of remaining at the beginning of the genealogy.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe sons of Reuben. The text did not want to begin directly with Levi, which might make it look as if he were to be regarded as the first-born from now on in honor of Moses. So his older brothers are included to put him third, in his proper place.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe heads of their respective clans. This genealogy was not given earlier because only now (v. 13) was Aaron fully associated with Moses in the mission to Pharaoh (Gersonides). The story of Abraham is preceded by a comparable genealogy giving his descent from Noah (Abarbanel). The unworthiness of the descendants of Reuben and Simeon demonstrates that God was right to choose Moses and Aaron for this assignment rather than someone from the elder tribes (Sforno).
\nExodus 6:15\u201316
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why are the ages of Levi (v. 16), Kohath (v. 18), and Amram (v. 20) given, but not those of anyone else?
\nExodus 6:15
\nIBN EZRA
\nOhad. This family died off either in Egypt or in the wilderness, for it is not mentioned in the comparable list of Num. 26:12\u201313. Zohar. This is \u201cZerah\u201d of Num. 26:13.
\nExodus 6:16
\nRASHI
\nThe span of Levi\u2019s life. Why is this figure given? To let us know how long the period of slavery was. For as long as any of the 12 sons of Jacob remained alive, there was no slavery. \u201cJoseph died, and all his brothers, and all that generation\u201d (1:6), after which \u201ca new king arose over Egypt who did not know Joseph\u201d (1:8). Levi was the last of that generation to die.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe span of Levi\u2019s life. As I have explained in my comment to Gen. 5:31, this is part of the chronological framework of the Bible. The Torah enumerates the life spans of all the generations up to Noah; then from Noah to Abraham; then those of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Levi, Kohath, Amram, and Moses. The rest of the Bible continues by enumerating the life spans of Joshua, the judges, and the kings; the 70 years of exile in Babylon; and, in Daniel, the years of the Second Temple.
\nIBN EZRA
\nLevi. This genealogy is the point of the passage, whose purpose is to describe the lineage of Moses and Aaron. Reuben and Simeon are mentioned only because they are the older brothers. Similarly, Aaron is mentioned before Moses in v. 26 because he was the older brother. 137 years. Levi\u2019s age is given (which those of Reuben and Simeon are not) in honor of Moses and Aaron.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nBy their lineage. For Reuben and Simeon, only those who came down to Egypt are included. But for Levi, the lineage and the ages of the ancestors of the prophets Moses and Aaron are included, out of respect for them. Moreover, since they themselves were faithful followers of the Most High, they deserved to have their lineage given just like Moses and Aaron, the \u201cfathers of the world.\u201d
\nExodus 6:18\u201327
\nExodus 6:18\u201325
\nRASHBAM
\nThe sons of Kohath: Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel. The text lists the sons of Amram, Izhar, and Uzziel, but not those of Hebron. Should you think that Hebron had no sons, Num. 26:58 makes clear that there was a \u201cclan of the Hebronites.\u201d But none of Hebron\u2019s children are mentioned in the Torah, as are those of Amram (Aaron, Moses, and Miriam), Izhar (Korah; see Num. 16:1), and Uzziel (Mishael and Elzaphan; see Lev. 10:4). The sons of Korah: Assir, Elkanah, and Abiasaph. They appear in Num. 26:12, \u201cThe sons of Korah, however, did not die.\u201d The sons of Aaron are mentioned in 24:1, \u201cCome up to the Lord, with Aaron, Nadab and Abihu.\u201d Aaron\u2019s son Eliezer is mentioned because of his own son, Phinehas. But again the sons of Ithamar are not listed here because there was no need to mention them later in the Torah.
\nExodus 6:18\u201320
\nRASHI
\nThe span of Kohath\u2019s life \u2026 the span of Amram\u2019s life. From these figures we can determine that the 400-year period of oppression mentioned in Gen. 15:13 was not restricted entirely to the Israelite settlement in Egypt, but began with the birth of Isaac. For Kohath was one of the original people who came down to Egypt. Even if you add all of Kohath\u2019s 133 years, Amram\u2019s 137 years, and the 80 years of Moses\u2019 life up until the exodus, you still do not get 400 years. And of course many of Amram\u2019s years overlap those of Kohath, and many of Moses\u2019 years overlap those of Amram.
\nExodus 6:18
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe span of Kohath\u2019s life was 133 years. His life span is given (which those of Gershon and Merari are not) in honor of God\u2019s messengers, Moses and Aaron, who were his descendants.
\nExodus 6:19
\nIBN EZRA
\nThese are the families of the Levites by their heritage. These only. For those who came down from Canaan to Egypt had no more children.
\nExodus 6:20
\nRASHI
\nHis father\u2019s sister Jochebed. A daughter of Levi and sister of Kohath.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe span of Amram\u2019s life was 137 years. Again, this is given in honor of his sons.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHis father\u2019s sister. How could God agree to have a man as great as Moses come from a marriage that would later be forbidden (Lev. 18:12)? A leader must carry some baggage that will prevent him from lording it over the public. David\u2019s Moabite ancestry served the same function (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 6:21
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe sons of Izhar. They are mentioned because of Korah, who would quarrel with Moses.
\nExodus 6:22
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe sons of Uzziel. They are included because Mishael and Elzaphan are singled out to their credit in Lev. 10:4. But the text did not bother to include the sons of Hebron.
\nExodus 6:23
\nRASHI
\nSister of Nahshon. Since she is already identified by her father\u2019s name, we learn from the inclusion of her brother\u2019s name as well that one should check out the brothers of one\u2019s future wife.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAaron took to wife Elisheba. She is mentioned in Eleazar\u2019s honor. Sister of Nahshon. This is mentioned on account of the secret of the priesthood.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAaron took to wife Elisheba. Just as the mother of the prophets Moses and Aaron is mentioned, out of respect for them, and to make clear that she was a descendant of the righteous Levi, and to hint that a great miracle was done for her, so the mother of the priesthood is mentioned, who was connected to the royal house and sister of its prince.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAaron took to wife Elisheba. Moses\u2019 wife has already been identified in 2:21 (Gersonides).
\nExodus 6:24
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe sons of Korah. They are mentioned since, unlike their father, they were righteous men: \u201cThe sons of Korah \u2026 did not die\u201d (Num. 26:11). The prophet Samuel was a descendant of Korah.
\nExodus 6:25
\nRASHI
\nOne of Putiel\u2019s daughters. He was a descendant of Jethro who fattened (pittem) calves for idolatry, and of Joseph who mastered (pitpet) his sexual urge.
\nIBN EZRA
\nEleazar took to wife one of Putiel\u2019s daughters. She is mentioned in honor of Phinehas, to whose descendants was given eternal priesthood (Num. 25:10\u201313). It is therefore obvious that Putiel must have been an Israelite. But we do not know the meaning of Putiel, any more than we do that of Mishael or even that of Aaron. In fact, if not for 2:10, we would not even know why Moses was called Moses.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nOne of Putiel\u2019s daughters. She is mentioned out of respect for her son Phinehas, who earned the priesthood on his own (Num. 25:13), not just as a descendant of Aaron. If \u201cPutiel\u201d is simply a name, the point of mentioning the name of a man whom we don\u2019t know remains unexplained. Therefore the Sages offered the comment mentioned by Rashi. But the mention must be a flattering one, for his descendants earned eternal priesthood by their righteousness. Treating the text straightforwardly, however, we might simply point out that Scripture mentions the names of the kings\u2019 mothers; e.g., 1 Kings 15:2, 2 Chron. 20:31, and so on. Or it may be that in his time Putiel was well known and respected, and his name was included to flatter the priests. The text says \u201cone of Putiel\u2019s daughters\u201d rather than \u201cPutiel\u2019s daughter\u201d either because he had many daughters and he selected the one to be married to Eleazar, or because she was not his daughter but his granddaughter, her relation to him being noted because of his fame. This would explain why her own name was not given.
\nExodus 6:26
\nRASHI
\nThe same Aaron and Moses mentioned in v. 20 are the ones in our story. The two names are sometimes cited with Aaron first, and sometimes with Moses first, to indicate that the two were of equal stature. Troop by troop. The troops were organized by tribes.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAaron and Moses. Aaron is mentioned first because he was older. Moreover, he prophesied to Israel before Moses did.
\nExodus 6:27
\nRASHI
\nIt was they who spoke to Pharaoh. It was they who were commanded (v. 26) and they who fulfilled the command. The same Moses and Aaron. The expression \u201cthe same\u201d implies that their righteousness in performing their assignment from God remained \u201cthe same\u201d from beginning to end.
\nRASHBAM
\nIt was they who spoke \u2026 the same Moses and Aaron. For when it came to speaking to Pharaoh, Moses took precedence. But v. 26, following the genealogy, lists them in birth order, with Aaron taking precedence.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses and Aaron. Once their speaking to Pharaoh is mentioned, Moses is given precedence, since he spoke face to face with God, while Aaron was merely a prophet; as God says, \u201cWhen a prophet of the Lord arises among you, I make Myself known to him in a vision, I speak with him in a dream. Not so with My servant Moses\u201d (Num. 12:6\u20137). Notice that Aaron twice refers to Moses as \u201cmy lord\u201d (32:22; Num. 12:11). From this point on, you will not find the expression \u201cAaron and Moses\u201d anywhere in the Torah, the Prophets, or the Writings, except when their genealogy is discussed (Num. 3:1 and 26:59; 1 Chron. 5:29 and 23:13).
\nExodus 6:28\u20137:2
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God again repeat (v. 29) the command to pass His message on to Pharaoh?
\n\u2666 Why does v. 30 repeat v. 12?
\n\u2666 Why does v. 1 repeat the assurance of 4:16 that Moses will play the role of God to Aaron?
\nExodus 6:28
\nRASHI
\nFor when the Lord spoke. This verse is the first half of a sentence that is continued in v. 29.
\nIBN EZRA
\nFor when \u2026 It is amazing that the editor of the text separated this verse from v. 29, when (as the translations show) the two verses clearly make up a single sentence. The same phenomenon occurs at Deut. 2:16\u201317. Perhaps the paragrapher had a reason for doing so, his intellect being more expansive than ours.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhen the Lord spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt. It may be that this is not the first half of a sentence that continues in v. 29, but the end of the sentence that begins in v. 27. OJPS makes this possibility somewhat clearer: \u201cThese are that Moses and Aaron. And it came to pass on the day when the Lord spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt.\u201d (\u201cThat\u201d at the beginning of v. 29 in OJPS is not in the Hebrew.) Vv. 26\u201327 might lead one to think that God spoke equally to both Aaron and Moses; v. 28 makes clear that God spoke to Moses and that it was only the command to bring the Israelites out of Egypt that applied equally to both Aaron and Moses. This would account for the division between the aliyot being made at the end of v. 28.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhen the Lord spoke to Moses in the land of Egypt. This was the moment when Moses was given prophetic precedence over Aaron, as the arrangement of their names shows. That is why the break between sections occurs after this verse. For the section breaks undoubtedly derive from Moses by divine inspiration (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 6:29
\nRASHI
\nThe Lord said to Moses. This verse is a repetition of v. 11. The text resumes after the interruption of the genealogical information by repeating it. I am the Lord. I am competent to send you and to carry out the things I sent you to say.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI am the Lord. See my comment to v. 13.
\nExodus 6:30
\nRASHI
\nMoses appealed to the Lord. This is the repetition of v. 12. Such \u201crepetitive resumption\u201d is standard. It is like a man saying to his friend, \u201cNow let\u2019s return to the original subject.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nHow then should Pharaoh heed me? Vv. 29\u201330 repeat vv. 11\u201312, which introduce the topic but cut it short in order to include the genealogy introducing Moses and Aaron before they speak to Pharaoh.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSee, I am of impeded speech. Some think that Moses said this to God twice (see v. 12), but that God did not answer him (7:1) until he repeated it. But in fact v. 30 picks up the story at the point of interruption.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI am of impeded speech. God\u2019s instruction in v. 29, \u201cSpeak to Pharaoh,\u201d made Moses think that his association with Aaron was only for speaking to Israel. Hence he repeated this argument to God (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:1
\nRASHI
\nI place you in the role of God to Pharaoh. Judge and chastiser, to chastise him with blows and suffering. As your prophet. Following Onkelos, \u201cas your interpreter.\u201d Such is the biblical prophet: one who announces words of rebuke to the people. Etymologically navi, \u201cprophet,\u201d comes from the verb nuv, \u201cto bear fruit,\u201d as used in Isa. 57:19 and Prov. 10:31.
\nRASHBAM
\nYour prophet. Your spokesman.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIn the role of God. With the appearance of an angel. And Aaron will be the prophet. This is the response to Moses\u2019 fear (6:30) that Pharaoh would not listen to him. God speaks to the prophet, and the prophet to the people. Those who say that navi, \u201cprophet,\u201d comes from the verb nuv (\u201cto bear fruit\u201d), as in Isa. 57:19, are incorrect. For nuv is biconsonantal (in the terminology of the French grammarians) or hollow (in the terminology of the Spanish), but navi is from the triconsonantal root \u05e0\u05d1\u05d0.
\nExodus 7:2
\nRASHI
\nYou shall repeat. You shall repeat each message once, exactly as you heard it from My mouth, and your brother Aaron shall articulate it elegantly in Pharaoh\u2019s ears.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou shall repeat to Aaron all that I command you, and your brother Aaron shall speak to Pharaoh. When Moses goes to Pharaoh, even if Aaron is not mentioned we know that they always went together.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYou shall repeat. Rashi\u2019s comment is completely wrong.
\nExodus 7:3\u20135
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 As readers of this text have asked from the very beginning\u2014if God hardened Pharaoh\u2019s heart (v. 3), what was his sin?
\n\u2666 How is v. 4 anything other than a repetition of v. 3?
\nExodus 7:3
\nRASHI
\nI will harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart. Because he has spoken disdainfully of Me, and it is clear to Me that gentiles take no satisfaction in wholehearted repentance, it is best that his heart be hardened in order that I might perform many wonders against him, so you Israelites will recognize My might.\u2014Such is God\u2019s method: He punishes the other nations so that Israel will heed and fear Him. Thus it says, \u201cI wiped out nations.\u2026 And I thought that [Jerusalem] would fear Me, would learn a lesson\u201d (Zeph. 3:6\u20137). Nonetheless, for the first five plagues the text says not \u201cThe Lord stiffened Pharaoh\u2019s heart\u201d but \u201cPharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart. Many have wondered how Pharaoh can be considered to have sinned if God hardened his heart. Some great minds reply that what God did was to strengthen Pharaoh\u2019s ability to bear his troubles. My answer is that God gives man wisdom and plants within his heart the intelligence to receive a higher power that enables him to increase his pleasure, or to lessen his pain. I will explain this further in my comments to 33:23 and Deut. 5:26.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart. According to Exodus Rabbah, God here reveals to Moses that He intends to harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart in order to give him the punishment he deserves for having enslaved the Israelites so harshly. The midrash adds: \u201c \u2018I have hardened his heart\u2019 (10:1). R. Johanan said: This gives heretics an opening to say that he had no opportunity to repent. R. Simeon b. Lakish said: The heretics can just shut up. \u2018At scoffers He scoffs\u2019 (Prov. 3:34). God warns a man once, twice, even thrice, and he does not repent? At that point, God locks the door of repentance on him in order to punish him for his sin. Thus it was with Pharaoh the wicked. The Holy One messaged him five times, and he paid no attention. The Holy One said to him: You have stiffened your neck and hardened your heart; now I will add uncleanness to your own uncleanness.\u201d
\nThis midrash answers the question that everyone asks. If God hardened his heart, what was his sin? There are two explanations for it, and both are true. One is that Pharaoh, having done such evil to Israel for no reason, deserved to have the way of repentance blocked to him, as is shown by numerous verses both in the Torah and in the rest of the Bible, and was being punished for his original deeds. The second explanation is that half the plagues against him\u2014those where it is not said that \u201cGod hardened Pharaoh\u2019s heart\u201d but that \u201cPharaoh became stubborn\u201d (and the like)\u2014were indeed justified, by his refusal to honor God by letting the Israelites go. But when the plagues grew worse and he could no longer stand them, his heart softened, and he was convinced to let them go\u2014but by the severity of the plagues, not to do the will of his Creator. It was at that point that God hardened his spirit and toughened his heart, \u201cin order that His fame might resound throughout the world\u201d (9:16). \u201cThus will I manifest My greatness and My holiness, and make Myself known in the sight of many nations\u201d (Ezek. 38:23). When God says already before the plagues, \u201cI, however, will stiffen his heart so that he will not let the people go\u201d (4:21), He is informing Moses of what he is going to do in the last five plagues. God, after all, already knows that Pharaoh will refuse to let them go until he is forced (3:19). And indeed, in the last five plagues, and also at the splitting of the sea, it says that God hardened Pharaoh\u2019s heart. \u201cLike channeled water is the mind of the king in the Lord\u2019s hand; He directs it to whatever He wishes\u201d (Prov. 21:1).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI will harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart. The moral question is posed even more sharply in the case of Sihon in Deut. 2:30: \u201cKing Sihon of Heshbon refused to let us pass through, because the Lord had stiffened his will and hardened his heart in order to deliver him into your power.\u201d There are three answers to the question of why Pharaoh was not allowed to repent: (1) Pharaoh and the Egyptians still deserved punishment for what they did to Israel; (2) the availability of repentance is a grace given by God specifically to Israel, the nation that is under his particular providence; (3) but the most correct answer is simply that God did not (God forbid!) harden Pharaoh\u2019s heart directly, but indirectly by inflicting plagues upon him and then removing them, letting Pharaoh think that they were therefore not from God (Abarbanel). Since Pharaoh would undoubtedly have let the Israelites go immediately simply because he could not bear the plagues, God hardened his heart for two purposes: first, to give the Egyptians an opportunity for repentance, and second, so that Israel should see and fear the Lord, and so that \u201cyou may recount in the hearing of your sons and of your sons\u2019 sons how I made a mockery of the Egyptians and how I displayed My signs among them\u2014in order that you may know that I am the Lord\u201d (10:2). Had Pharaoh sincerely wanted to repent, nothing would have prevented it (Sforno).
\nExodus 7:4
\nRASHI
\nMy hand. Literally\u2014to strike them with it.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMy hand. My blows, which (among humans) are given with the hand. My ranks. Saadia believes that \u201cHosts\u201d in the term \u201cLord of Hosts\u201d refers to Israel; note the OJPS \u201cMy hosts\u201d here. But I believe it refers to the \u201chosts of heaven.\u201d Just as the angels are God\u2019s ranks in heaven, the Israelites are His ranks on earth.
\nExodus 7:5
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord. Their lord and ruler. For up to this point their attitude was, \u201cI do not know the Lord\u201d (5:2).
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord. The purpose of the blows to be inflicted is to spread His fame throughout the world.
\nExodus 7:6\u201311
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is Aaron included in the instructions (vv. 8\u20139) for the marvel of the serpent, but in none of the others?
\n\u2666 What made God so sure (v. 9) that Pharaoh (who had no desire even to listen to them, and who had told them in 5:4, \u201cGet to your labors!\u201d) would ask them to produce a marvel?
\n\u2666 Why is the same trick that is previously called a \u201csign\u201d now called a \u201cmarvel\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why must Aaron perform the marvel with his rod rather than Moses with his, as previously instructed?
\n\u2666 Why does the rod here turn into a \u201cserpent\u201d rather than a \u201csnake\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why did they perform this marvel (v. 10) without first warning Pharaoh that it was about to happen, as they did with all the previous ones?
\n\u2666 If this marvel could only be performed through the power of God, \u201cwho alone works great marvels\u201d (Ps. 136:4), how were the magicians (v. 11) able to do it?
\nExodus 7:6
\nIBN EZRA
\nThis Moses and Aaron did. This is a general statement indicating that all of the plagues were performed by both Aaron and Moses. Later, each plague will be described individually.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSo they did. Even though it meant taking their lives in their hands (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 7:7
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three. These are the only prophets anywhere in the Bible who are identified as prophesying in their old age. For they were of greater stature than any other prophet. The others were prophets of reproof, or foretold the future, but only to Moses and Aaron did God speak from a pillar of cloud, and it is through them that the righteous inherit the World To Come.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three. One does not send emotional youngsters to the king for such a task, but elders who have acquired wisdom (Abarbanel). Despite their old age, they rose early to do their Creator\u2019s will with alacrity. Even in those days, 80 was quite old, as we learn from Moses\u2019 own words: \u201cA prayer of Moses.\u2026 The span of our life is seventy years, or, given the strength, eighty years\u201d (Ps. 90:1,10) (Sforno).
\nExodus 7:8
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses and Aaron. God knew that the first time (5:2) Pharaoh would merely deny knowing the Lord; only now would he demand a marvel, requiring Aaron\u2019s involvement.
\nExodus 7:9
\nRASHI
\nMarvel. A sign to prove that the one who sends you has power. A serpent. A snake.
\nIBN EZRA
\nTake your rod. A number of intelligent commentators are under the mistaken impression that there are three rods, but there is just one, referred to in different ways, depending on the context. It is called \u201cthe rod of God\u201d (4:20) because of the signs that God showed Moses with it, not (as some say) because the name of God was carved on it. The rod itself had no intrinsic power; after all, even though Moses stretched it out to begin the plague of locusts (10:13), the locusts did not actually come until God drove them in with the east wind. The same thing happened at the splitting of the sea (14:21). With the plagues of the animal swarms, pestilence, boils, and the slaying of the first-born, there is no mention of the rod at all, nor with the appearance of the manna, which involved 10 miracles all by itself. It is referred to as Moses\u2019 rod (e.g., in 9:23, \u201cMoses held out his rod toward the sky\u201d) because Moses performed the signs with it. The same applies whether Moses is performing an \u201cupper\u201d sign, holding his arm out toward the sky (presumably in 10:22, for the plague of darkness, he is holding the rod as he did for the others) or a \u201clower\u201d one, holding the rod over the land or sea. And it is called Aaron\u2019s rod because of the signs performed by him at God\u2019s command to Moses. Note that the same rod is associated both with Moses and with Aaron in 17:5, \u201cThen the Lord said to Moses, \u2018\u2026 take along the rod with which you struck the Nile,\u2019 \u201d an action that was performed by Aaron (7:19\u201320). But all of Aaron\u2019s signs (the serpent, the Nile, the frogs, and the lice) are of the \u201clower\u201d sort. The necessity to hold out the rod might be to show the onlookers that the one holding the rod is performing the sign. Finally, the first and last signs\u2014turning into a snake (4:3) and producing almond blossoms (Num. 17:23)\u2014were performed by the rod on its own!
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nProduce your marvel. I know the man; he will insist that you perform a miracle to confirm your bona fides. But do not do so; simply perform the \u201csign\u201d that I showed you (Abarbanel). A serpent. Hinting that Pharaoh, the \u201cmighty serpent\u201d of Ezek. 29:3, will be swallowed up and eliminated from the world (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 7:10
\nIBN EZRA
\nA serpent. Whereas in the sign Moses was given for the Israelites (4:3), it merely turned into a snake. But according to Japheth b. Ali the snake and the serpent are the same thing.
\nExodus 7:11
\nRASHI
\nBy their spells. The Hebrew word b\u2019lahateihem is unique, occurring only here in the Bible (see my comment to v. 22). The linguistic connection with \u201cthe fiery [lahat] ever-turning sword\u201d (Gen. 3:24) suggests that the word in that verse might really mean that the sword was kept \u201cever-turning\u201d by a magic spell.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWise men. The astrologers. Sorcerers. Those who \u201cchange\u201d natural objects by fooling the eye. Magicians. Those who actually know the secrets of nature. The Hebrew word probably derives from Egyptian or Babylonian, for it is used in the Bible only in connection with these two peoples. Did the same. But actually the text itself makes clear that, unlike Moses , the magicians performed their action only \u201cwith their spells.\u201d The Hebrew etymology of \u201cspells\u201d makes clear that the reference is only to sleight-of-hand, which fools the eye for a moment. So they did not actually \u201cdo\u201d it except from their own perspective. Some great minds have decided that God performed this wonder merely by removing the dryness of the rod. They have also told stories that they made up themselves about the swallowing of the rods, and do not realize that \u201call their wisdom is swallowed up\u201d (Ps. 107:27). They \u201cvexed the Holy One of Israel\u201d (Ps. 78:41)! But we believe that it happened just as the text says, though we don\u2019t grasp how it happened. For there are many things in nature that the wise men of the world do not understand, like stones that attract iron, neutralize acid, make sounds, or gather straw; or the electric eel. All the more so with things still more wonderful than this, as I have explained in my commentary on the book of Job.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe wise men. The wise men were the leaders and the elders, those who were \u201cwise\u201d in conjuring and summoning demons. The Egyptian magicians. The term includes both the \u201cwise men\u201d and the \u201csorcerers.\u201d The etymology of the Hebrew word is unknown; see the comment of Ibn Ezra. But Rashi\u2019s suggestion (in his comment to Gen. 41:8) that it is Aramaic for \u201cnecromancers,\u201d those who work themselves into a frenzy by using the bones of the dead, is plausible. For it is known that magical skill primarily involves the bones of the dead, or animal bones; see B. Sanh. 65b. Their spells. According to our Sages, this refers to magic performed by destructive angels. The word is derived from the root \u05dc\u05d4\u05d8, meaning \u201cburn,\u201d because spells are performed by \u201cburners,\u201d fiery angels who can set fire to a man without his even realizing he is burning: \u201cIt blazed upon them all about, but they heeded not; it burned among them, but they gave it no thought\u201d (Isa. 42:25). Note the \u201cchariots of fire\u201d that Elisha\u2019s servant sees\u2014when Elisha prays that God open his eyes\u2014in 2 Kings 6:17. Perhaps these \u201cburners\u201d are the angels who dwell in the air, in the spheres of the elements, who are called \u201crulers.\u201d I will have more to say on this subject later, with the help of God, my Rock. But they say that the differently written word translated \u201cspells\u201d in 7:22 means that they were performed by means of demons, and is derived from \u05dc\u05d5\u05d8, meaning \u201csecretly,\u201d for that is how demons operate, being creatures whose bodies are made of air and can therefore not be sensed.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMagicians. Since to this day nothing is known to us about the nature of magic, there is no point in discussing it (Gersonides). The existence of magic is established by the Torah and confirmed by our Sages (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:12\u201315
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did God have to tell Moses that Pharaoh refused (v. 14), which he already knew?
\nExodus 7:12
\nRASHI
\nAaron\u2019s rod swallowed their rods. After turning back into a rod, it swallowed them all.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAaron\u2019s rod. It is called his \u201crod\u201d rather than his \u201cserpent\u201d because that is what it originally was. But Jeshua b. Judah says that it reverted to being a rod and then swallowed them, which would be a great marvel. Swallowed their rods. A second miracle\u2014after turning into a serpent, it swallowed the magicians\u2019 rods and they disappeared.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThey turned into serpents. In form and appearance. But they were not able to move like serpents (Sforno). Swallowed their rods. Proving that it was a real serpent, not an illusion as theirs were. This should have been enough to convince Pharaoh (Gersonides).
\nExodus 7:13
\nRASHBAM
\nPharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened. Assuming that Aaron did what he did by magic as well.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened. Of its own accord, once he had seen that the magicians did what Aaron did.
\nExodus 7:14
\nRASHI
\nStubborn. This word is indeed an adjective, not a verb as Onkelos makes it.
\nRASHBAM
\nStubborn. Technically, the word is a stative verb, not an adjective; these are often used to describe the state or condition that a person is in. It implies, \u201cPharaoh made himself (or, with OJPS, his heart) stubborn.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nIs stubborn. This is a stative verb.
\nExodus 7:15
\nRASHI
\nAs he is coming out to the water. To relieve himself. For he pretended to be a god, who had no need to relieve himself; so he would get up early every morning and do it in the Nile.
\nRASHBAM
\nAs he is coming out to the water. As is the custom of rulers, to go out in the morning and ride here and there.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAs he is coming out to the water. It is the custom of the king of Egypt to this day to go out in July and August, which is the flood season, to check on the level of the Nile. God commanded Moses to perform this marvel with the Nile in Pharaoh\u2019s sight while he was out there.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nComing out to the water. It is the custom of nobles and kings to go hawking by the riverbanks. Moses could speak to him there because there would not be many people around (Bekhor Shor). Some explain this to mean that Moses should take the opportunity to speak to him outside the palace, in order not to invoke God\u2019s name in a place full of idols (Hizkuni). As one goes out in the morning for a stroll to warm the body before eating. According to Ibn Kaspi, it was and still is the custom of the king of Egypt to go out with his courtiers on Tuesdays and Saturdays to play ball at a particular spot along the Nile from morning until it is time to eat (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:16\u201320
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since Pharaoh does not acknowledge God, and has not yet seen a sign that his own magicians could not perform, what is the point of being indignant that Pharaoh has \u201cpaid no heed\u201d (v. 16)?
\n\u2666 Why is the warning that Pharaoh \u201cshall know that I am the Lord\u201d (v. 17) given only for the first, fourth, and seventh plagues, but not for the others? It should have been given for them all!
\n\u2666 How are we to resolve the apparent contradiction and the lack of clarity among vv. 17, 19, and 20 over who performed the sign and with which rod?
\n\u2666 Why did all the instructions have to be repeated to Moses again in v. 19?
\nExodus 7:16
\nRASHI
\nUntil now. Thus far. The midrash interprets it to mean, You will not heed me until the word \u201cthus\u201d\u2014the word that begins the phrase \u201cthus says the Lord\u201d in which God announces the killing of the first-born.
\nRASHBAM
\nBy this you shall know that I am the Lord. Since you made a point of saying, \u201cI do not know the Lord\u201d (5:2).
\nIBN EZRA
\nSay to him. This speech was necessary because it was to announce the first of the plagues (if Pharaoh would not heed). The rod that turned into a serpent was a marvel, but not a plague.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYou have paid no heed until now. This is the warning that God will now switch from mere marvels to harmful plagues. Pharaoh has brought them on himself by not obeying the commands of his Creator. Since saying, \u201cI do not know the Lord, nor will I let Israel go\u201d (5:2), Pharaoh has not explicitly announced that he would not heed God or let Israel go. He did not even rebuke Moses and Aaron, merely listened to them in silence. For from the moment they turned the rod into a serpent that swallowed the rods of his magicians, he had been afraid of the potential plagues. But with the first plagues he tried to have the magicians imitate them, assuming they were magic. He was afraid, but strengthened his resolve; hence \u201cwhen the Egyptian magicians did the same with their spells, Pharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened\u201d (v. 22).
\nExodus 7:17
\nRASHI
\nIt will be turned into blood. Since it never rains in Egypt, and the earth is watered only by the flooding of the Nile, the Egyptians worship it. So He struck first at their god, and only then did He strike them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nBy this you shall know. By the fact that I strike the water with the rod and turn it into blood. The rod that is in my hand. Even though (according to v. 19) the rod was to be in Aaron\u2019s hand, the text treats them interchangeably in performing the sign.
\nExodus 7:18
\nRASHI
\nThe Egyptians will find it impossible. Rather, in accordance with the usual meaning of this Hebrew word, they will be helpless to seek healing for the waters of the Nile in order to make them fit to drink.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Egyptians will find it impossible. As I explained in my comment to Gen. 19:11, the verb is a synonyms of \u201cwill not be able\u201d; in French we call it ennui.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe fish. A generic term, inclusive of everything that swarms in the water. Will find it impossible. Will not be able. The verb is from the root \u05dc\u05d0\u05d4. Some think the word lo (\u201cnot\u201d) is from this root, but that is farfetched.
\nExodus 7:19
\nRASHI
\nSay to Aaron. Since the Nile had defended Moses when he was cast into it as a baby, it was not struck by his hand, neither in the plague of blood nor in that of frogs. It was struck by Aaron instead. Its rivers, its canals. When the Nile rises, its water goes up by canals and irrigates the fields. Throughout the land of Egypt. Even in the bathhouses and the bathtubs in private homes.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHold out your arm in every direction. Over the waters of Egypt. This is the general statement, which is then specified. According to Saadia, the unusual reduplicated construct form of \u201cwater\u201d used here, meme-, indicates fresh water, while the standard me- indicates salt water. But he forgets Josh. 4:7, where me- refers to the waters of the Jordan. In any case, meme- is always used whenever the word has a pronominal suffix. Its rivers. There are other rivers in Egypt than the Nile. Its canals. Literally, \u201cits Niles\u201d\u2014for the Nile runs in many channels. Its ponds. Where rainwater collects. All its bodies of water. Man-made fountains, wells, and cisterns. Vessels of wood or stone. Such as troughs and basins in gardens and palaces, where there is always water.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nIts rivers. All the rivers of Egypt are branches of the Nile (Abarbanel). Its canals. Note that the Nile is also called \u201cthe Canal.\u201d The same word is used in Dan. 12:5 for the Tigris (Kimhi).
\nExodus 7:20
\nRASHBAM
\nIn the sight of Pharaoh. This demonstrated to Pharaoh the honor paid to Moses: It was Aaron, his deputy, who would lift up the rod and strike.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe lifted up the rod. In my opinion, v. 19 makes clear that it was Aaron who lifted up the rod and struck the Nile. The water in the Nile. The verse does not bother to describe this happening to all the waters of Egypt, merely saying that they \u201cdid just as the Lord commanded.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHe lifted up the rod and struck the water. He stretched his hand out over the land of Egypt in every direction and then struck the Nile. The water in the Nile was turned to blood before Pharaoh\u2019s eyes, \u201cand there was blood throughout the land of Egypt\u201d (v. 21) as well. But Ibn Ezra thinks he lifted up the rod in order to strike the water, and the text simply did not bother to record his stretching his hand out over the land of Egypt.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses and Aaron did just as the Lord commanded. Moses struck the Nile (v. 17) and Aaron struck as much of the rest of the water in Egypt (v. 19) as he could find (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:21\u201324
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Was all the water in Egypt turned to blood (v. 19), or just the water of the Nile (v. 20)?
\nExodus 7:21
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Egyptians could not drink water. Because it was polluted by the corpses of the fish killed when it turned to blood. But it had already turned back into water. This is why there was water for the magicians to turn into blood (v. 22) and why Pharaoh did not ask them to turn it back into water (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 7:22
\nRASHI
\nSpells. The Hebrew word is written differently from that used in v. 11; the one used here implies something whispered in secret. The Sages interpret this word to mean actions performed by demons, and the one in v. 11 to mean actions performed by magic. Pharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened. He said to them, \u201cWould you carry straw to Hafaraim? You are bringing magic to Egypt, a land that is full of magic!\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nPharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened. On its own, as in v. 13. But note that after the plague of frogs, in 8:11, \u201che [himself] hardened his heart\u201d (OJPS). He does the same thing after the plague of insects, as the text notes: \u201cPharaoh became stubborn this time also\u201d (8:28).
\nIBN EZRA
\nWith their spells. The word b\u2019lateihem implies doing something in a hidden way, as when Jael killed Sisera after \u201cshe approached him stealthily [balat]\u201d (Judg. 4:21). It is not the same word as that used in v. 11. Did the same. Some ask: Where did the magicians find any water that had not already been turned into blood, with which to perform this trick? Answer: We know from v. 24 that Aaron had not turned the subsurface water into blood. This is where the magicians got water. But what they did cannot be compared to what Aaron did. For he turned all the water in the land to blood for seven days, whether it was in his presence or not, even running water that was replaced every moment with new water. Whereas they merely turned a little bit of water in a container into blood, and even that changed back to water as soon as Pharaoh went home.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nDid the same. With water from somewhere in Egypt that Aaron had missed striking (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:23
\nRASHI
\nEven to this. \u201cThis\u201d refers to the marvel of the staff that turned into a serpent, not to the plague of blood.
\nIBN EZRA
\nEven to this. He paid as little regard to the plague of blood as he had to the rod that became a serpent.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nEven to this. \u201cThis\u201d refers both to the marvel of the serpent and to the plague of blood. But more precisely it refers to the fact that this was a plague, not a mere marvel\u2014which should have made him fear that from now on the hand of God would be upon him.
\nExodus 7:24
\nIBN EZRA
\nHad to dig. Many people say that in the hands of an Egyptian the water was as red as blood, but it turned clear in the hands of an Israelite. If so, why doesn\u2019t the Torah mention this phenomenon? In my opinion, the plagues of blood, frogs, and lice all affected both the Egyptians and the Hebrews. We must pursue the meaning of the text! These plagues did little damage. But for the plague of swarms, which was severe, God separated the Egyptians and the Israelites. Similarly with the hail and the pestilence (on account of their cattle), though not with the boils, and not with the locusts that destroyed the crops\u2014for they were leaving Egypt anyway. In short, just as the Egyptians had to dig for drinking water, so did the Hebrews.
\nExodus 7:25\u20138:1
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does this plague last seven days (v. 25), and why must its duration be given at all?
\n\u2666 Why does the plague of frogs begin with \u201cgo to Pharaoh\u201d (v. 26), while other plagues begin with the instruction \u201cstation yourself\u201d and still others with no such instruction?
\n\u2666 Why is v. 29 necessary?
\nExodus 7:25
\nRASHI
\nWhen seven days had passed. Without the Nile turning back into water. More precisely, with OJPS, \u201cwhen seven days were fulfilled.\u201d For each plague lasted a quarter of a month, and the other three-quarters of the month Moses would exhort and forewarn them.
\nRASHBAM
\nSeven days. That is how long the plague of blood lasted.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhen seven days had passed. The plague went on for seven days. But this does not apply to the subsequent plagues. After the Lord struck the Nile. Despite Moses\u2019 saying, \u201cI shall strike the water in the Nile with the rod that is in my hand\u201d (v. 17), it was really the Lord who performed the miracle. He made it appear that Moses had done it so that everyone who saw him would realize that he was the messenger of God.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhen seven days had passed. Note that the Hebrew text links this verse with what precedes it, as does OJPS. The Egyptians were unable to drink from the Nile, and had to dig around it for water, until seven days had passed.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhen seven days had passed. Each plague lasted seven days. The Torah customarily spells out the details once and leaves them to be inferred in similar circumstances (Gersonides).
\nExodus 7:26
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord said to Moses, \u201cGo to Pharaoh.\u201d Moses twice gave warning to Pharaoh, before each of the first two plagues, but not before the third. The same is true all the way through. Every third plague (lice, boils, and darkness) takes place with no warning.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGo to Pharaoh. To his palace, not to the water. It was taken for granted that Aaron would go with him, since Moses would not speak with Pharaoh if Aaron did not come along.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo to Pharaoh. Note that the plagues are divided into groups of three. In each group, for the first plague Moses is to \u201cstation\u201d himself before Pharaoh publicly; for the second he is to \u201cgo\u201d to Pharaoh privately; and the third he simply does in public without announcing it to Pharaoh. The first set of plagues was to convince Pharaoh of God\u2019s existence, the second set was to convince him of God\u2019s providence, the third to convince him of God\u2019s power (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:27
\nRASHI
\nI will plague. The word does not imply that death would result. The same verb is used when one of the men in a brawl accidentally \u201cpushes\u201d a pregnant woman (21:22).
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will plague your whole country. That is, destroy it\u2014\u201cfrogs to destroy them\u201d (Ps. 78:45). Frogs. Some say the word translated \u201cfrog\u201d really refers to a kind of water creature found only in the Nile called in Arabic al-timsah, a \u201ccrocodile,\u201d which comes out of the water and seizes people. But given that they also came from \u201cthe rivers, the canals, and the ponds\u201d (8:1), it is more plausible that it refers to the more well-known creature.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nFrogs. Rather, the Hebrew word does indeed mean \u201ccrocodiles,\u201d as R. Hananel explained it. Rashi says the word \u201cplague\u201d here does not mean that death would result, but unless some lesser result is specified, this is just what it does mean\u2014and frogs do not kill people. Carnivores do not live in sweet water, but God brought the crocodiles up the Nile from their habitat in the ocean off Ethiopia. Once the Nile turned to blood, the crocodiles would have to come up on land to get food (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 7:28
\nRASHI
\nThey shall come up. From the Nile. Enter your palace and then the houses of your courtiers and your people. Since it was Pharaoh who originated the idea of \u201cdealing shrewdly\u201d (1:10) with the Israelites, he was punished first.
\nIBN EZRA
\nShall come up. Because the river is always lower than the city.
\nExodus 7:29
\nRASHI
\nOn you and on your people. Literally, in you and in your people: The frogs would get into their guts and croak.
\nIBN EZRA
\nOn you and on your people and on all your courtiers. According to Japheth b. Ali, this means: on them only, not on the Israelites. But this expression is no proof of that. In my opinion, it means what it says, that the frogs will come up everywhere\u2014in his clothes and on his head. There was no need to say explicitly that they affected the Israelites as well.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nOn you and on your people. Ibn Ezra rejects Japheth\u2019s comment that this means they did not affect the Israelites. But I think it is a fine interpretation, according with what our Sages said about all the plagues (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 8:1
\nIBN EZRA
\nHold out your hand. In every direction. Over the rivers, the canals, and the ponds. Note that the phrase \u201call its bodies of water,\u201d referring to fountains, wells, and cisterns, is not included here.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHold out your arm. To show that you control when the plague starts (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 8:2\u20136
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is the plague of frog unlike that of the blood, performed by Aaron alone (v. 2)? Why aren\u2019t the Ten Plagues performed either all by Moses or all by Aaron?
\n\u2666 Why was Pharaoh\u2019s heart not hardened when \u201cthe magicians did the same with their spells\u201d (v. 3)?
\n\u2666 What makes Pharaoh plead with Moses and Aaron (v. 4) to remove the frogs, which he did not do with the more serious plague that turned all the drinking water to blood?
\nExodus 8:2
\nRASHI
\nThe frogs came up. Literally, \u201cthe frog came up.\u201d There was just one frog. They kept hitting her, and she would squirt out swarm after swarm. Thus the midrash. But in context the explanation would seem to be that in Hebrew the singular can refer to a swarm of frogs.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAaron held out his arm. But he did not strike the water as he did with the plague of blood. He merely signaled that the frogs could come up. The frogs. Literally, \u201cthe frog\u201d; it refers to the species as a whole.
\nExodus 8:3
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe magicians did the same. But only with a small amount of water. Hence Pharaoh saw that what the magicians could do was only a pale imitation of what Aaron did, and that they could only make more frogs, not eliminate them. That is why \u201cPharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron\u201d (v. 4).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBrought frogs. Brought them, but could not actually create them (Sforno).
\nExodus 8:4
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron. He summoned both out of politeness. Plead with the Lord. This plague was much worse than the previous one\u2014\u201cfrogs to destroy them\u201d (Ps. 78:45).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nPlead with the Lord. Since Pharaoh did not ask for this with the subsequent plague of lice, it is clear that he was trying to determine whether this was a natural phenomenon that Moses and Aaron knew was coming, or one that they had produced themselves (Gersonides).
\nExodus 8:5
\nRASHI
\nYou may have this triumph over me. The Hebrew word used here means \u201cboast,\u201d as in Isa. 10:15. Here the implication is: \u201cYou may boast of how wise you are by asking me to do something great that (you think) I will be unable to do.\u201d And see my comments to Deut. 4:24. For what time shall I plead. Not \u201cwhat time\u201d (which would have meant \u201cwhen shall I plead?\u201d) but \u201cfor what time.\u201d That is: I will pray today on your behalf that the frogs shall be cut off at a time fixed by you. Tell me which time you choose. Then you will see whether I can fulfill my word at the time specified by you.
\nRASHBAM
\nYou may have this triumph over me. You may set yourself above me, to ask of me what you want and have me do it. One finds the same verb when God tells Gideon, \u201cIsrael might claim for themselves the glory due to Me\u201d (Judg. 7:2). For what time shall I plead in behalf of you? By what day and time do you want the frogs to be gone? I will plead, immediately, that they be dead by the time you request. For it would not be normal for them all to die at a single instant.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou may have this triumph over me. With OJPS, \u201cthis glory.\u201d I will let you have the glory of knowing that the whole world will see that they will be removed at exactly the moment specified by you. To remain only in the Nile. Where they had been to begin with. It obviously applied also to the other rivers and ponds where they had been before.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nFor what time shall I plead. Rashi takes it to mean, \u201cI will pray immediately for the plague to cease at whatever time you choose.\u201d The straightforward reading suggests that the plagues would depart as soon as Moses prayed. See v. 9, where it says, \u201cthe Lord did as Moses asked\u201d\u2014not \u201con the next day, the Lord did as Moses asked.\u201d Nor does our verse imply that Moses would pray immediately; \u201cfor what time\u201d merely means \u201cwhen.\u201d The preposition \u201cfor\u201d is used superfluously quite often in Biblical Hebrew, especially with expressions of time. That the frogs be cut off. \u201cCutting off\u201d implies their death; see 12:19 and 1 Kings 21:21.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nFor what time. Moses\u2019 ability to dictate the end of the plague demonstrated that it was a divine action, not a magical one. For magic works only for a limited time, and the instant the time expires, nature returns to its normal state (Sforno). To remain only in the Nile. More proof that they are really crocodiles; for there are frogs everywhere, not just in the Nile (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 8:6
\nRASHI
\nFor tomorrow. Pray today that they be cut off tomorrow.
\nRASHBAM
\nFor tomorrow. Pray now that they all be dead by tomorrow.
\nIBN EZRA
\nTomorrow. Samuel b. Hophni explains as follows: It would have been more natural for him to say, \u201cImmediately.\u201d But Pharaoh believed that the alignment of the stars had brought the frogs to Egypt and that Moses knew this. So Pharaoh figured that the plague was about to come to an end anyway, and he tested Moses to see whether he could prolong it beyond its natural extent.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nFor tomorrow. See the comment of Samuel b. Hophni cited by Ibn Ezra. But in my view, since Moses asked, \u201cFor what time?\u201d Pharaoh thought Moses was playing for time, and so he gave him a very short time, just until the next day. As you say. Since you are willing to wait until tomorrow, they shall not retreat until then.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThere is none like the Lord our God. For the stars that control the world cannot change their courses\u2014but God can change the course of events when those who cleave to Him request it (Gersonides).
\nExodus 8:7\u201313
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is it so important to emphasize (vv. 5,7) that the frogs will remain in the Nile?
\n\u2666 Why does Pharaoh ask that the frogs be removed \u201ctomorrow\u201d (v. 6) rather than immediately?
\n\u2666 Why Moses \u201ccry out\u201d (v. 8) about the frogs, as if in complaint?
\n\u2666 Why does Pharaoh become \u201cstubborn\u201d (v. 11) rather than \u201cstiffening\u201d his heart as before?
\n\u2666 Why does the plague of lice (v. 13) come without warning?
\n\u2666 How does \u201cthey did so\u201d jibe with the plague\u2019s being performed by Aaron alone?
\nExodus 8:7
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe frogs shall retreat. Moses made the promise without consulting God, confident that He would not embarrass him. From you and your courtiers and your people. Notice that Moses adds \u201cyour courtiers\u201d (as in 7:29), though Pharaoh omitted them in asking (v. 4).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe frogs shall retreat. Moses emphasizes that as soon as he prays they will all retreat, to keep Pharaoh from fearing that these frogs would die but others would come up from the Nile. The plague will depart entirely, even though some of the frogs remain in the Nile. All of this was to make clear to Pharaoh that the plague was carried out by God, and for no other reason than to make Pharaoh let Israel go.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThey shall remain only in the Nile. Moses repeats this to remind Pharaoh that the crocodiles will remain at hand should God need them again (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 8:8
\nRASHI
\nMoses \u2026 left and \u2026 cried out immediately that the frogs be cut off on the next day.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses cried out to the Lord. That the frogs should be gone by the next day.
\nExodus 8:9
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord did as Moses asked. What Moses had promised Pharaoh on his own initiative.
\nExodus 8:10
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe land stank. As had the water in the previous plague (7:21) (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 8:11
\nRASHI
\nAs the Lord had spoken. Where did He speak this? \u201cWhen Pharaoh does not heed you\u201d (7:4).
\nRASHBAM
\nHe became stubborn. Rather, with OJPS, \u201che hardened his heart\u201d (see my comment to 7:22). This plague was so great that his heart did not stiffen on its own, but he was so evil that he hardened it himself.
\nIBN EZRA
\nRelief. As I have explained in my note to Gen. 32:17, the metaphor is one of extra space, breathing room. Thus when David would play his lyre, the evil spirit would leave Saul, and \u201cSaul would find relief\u201d (1 Sam. 16:23). He became stubborn. OJPS \u201cHe hardened his heart\u201d gives the correct sense of the word; the grammatical formulation suggests an intense activity.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBecame stubborn. He steeled himself to ignore the stink, in order not to obey God (Sforno). Would not heed them. I presume that they indeed came before him to ask for the Israelites\u2019 release, that he refused, and that Moses warned him about the lice, as he had done the previous times (Gersonides).
\nExodus 8:12
\nRASHI
\nSay to Aaron. The dust, which had defended Moses when he killed the Egyptian (2:12) and hid him in the sand, did not deserve to be struck by him. So it was struck by Aaron.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSay to Aaron. Know that the first three plagues, which were of the \u201clower\u201d sort\u2014two with water and one with dust\u2014were all performed by Aaron; see my comment to 7:9. The plagues performed by Moses with the rod were of the \u201cupper\u201d sort\u2014the hail and locust were brought by the wind, and the darkness was also in the air\u2014since his status was higher than that of Aaron. Three plagues were performed without the use of the rod \u2014the swarm, the pestilence, and the slaying of the first-born\u2014and one, the boils, without the rod but by Moses with the slight participation of Aaron. It shall turn to lice. As in 9:9, the small amount of dust struck by Aaron would rise up and beget lice all over the land of Egypt.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nStrike the dust. The third plague in each set of three was done without warning, per Job 33:29, \u201cTruly, God does all these things two or three times to a man\u201d (Sforno).
\nExodus 8:13
\nRASHI
\nVermin. The word means \u201ca swarm.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nVermin \u2026 lice. Kinnam, \u201cvermin,\u201d is a singular collective noun; the -am at the end is simply a word ending and does not make it plural. But kinnim, \u201clice,\u201d is plural, indicating various types of lice and fleas.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey did so. Moses said it and Aaron did it. Vermin. The -am at the end of this Hebrew word is not part of the root; it is simply a word ending. Japheth b. Ali thinks it means \u201ctheir [the Egyptians\u2019] louse\u201d; see Josh. 7:21 for another word that appears to have both the definite article and a possessive suffix. All the dust of the earth \u2026 throughout the land of Egypt. Even though he struck the dust in a single place. The plagues of blood and boils worked the same way. It was merely a signal for the start of the plague, which was performed not by the rod, but by the One who created the earth by His power.
\nExodus 8:14\u201315
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How are we to resolve the contradiction between \u201cvermin came upon man and beast,\u201d where it seems that the vermin are simply being summoned, and \u201cthe earth turned to lice,\u201d where they are created from the earth?
\n\u2666 Why could the magicians not produce lice (v. 14)?
\n\u2666 Since the magicians could not produce lice, why does the text say that they \u201cdid the like\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why does the text repeat (vv. 13,14; see OJPS) that \u201cthere were gnats upon man, and upon beast\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why does Pharaoh\u2019s heart stiffen despite the magicians\u2019 warning (v. 15)? This is the opposite reaction from v. 11, where he became stubborn because there was relief!
\nExodus 8:14
\nRASHI
\nTo produce lice. To \u201cproduce\u201d them from some other place. But they could not. Because demons have no power over living creatures smaller than a grain of barley.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe magicians did the like. They struck the dust. To produce lice. From the dust of the earth, as Aaron had. The vermin remained. OJPS makes clear that this \u201cphrase\u201d repeats the expression of v. 13, \u201cthere were gnats upon man, and upon beast,\u201d but NJPS is correct in showing that the fact that vermin remained is what prompted the magicians to say that it was God\u2019s doing. See the next comment, however.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe magicians did the like with their spells to produce lice. That is, they struck the dust as Aaron had done, and tried to conjure up the demons with their spells as they had done the other times Aaron performed a sign. Alternatively, it might mean that they did what they had previously done successfully to produce lice, but they could not do it this time. The reasoning behind this interpretation is that the more skilled of the magicians knew what they could and could not do, so they must have had a reason to think they could produce lice.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe magicians did the like. It seems to me they did not want to produce them, but to get rid of them. Under the assumption that Moses had produced them by magic, they \u201cdid the like\u201d to get rid of them. When they could not, they realized it was God, not magic, that had produced them. Our Sages say that demons have no power over anything smaller than a lentil; but this is not the kind of comment one can argue with (Bekhor Shor). It is not because demons have no power over anything smaller than a grain of barley; if it were, they would have had no problem dealing with the swarms of v. 20 (Hizkuni). With due respect to the learning of Nahmanides, what this means is that, like Aaron, they did produce lice, but unlike Moses they could not get rid of them once produced (Abarbanel). They could not. Apparently \u201cmagic\u201d was unable to fool the eye when it came to something that small; this is the point of the Sages\u2019 remark (Gersonides).
\nExodus 8:15
\nRASHI
\nThis is the finger of God. This plague could not have been carried out by magic\u2014it could only have been performed by God. As the Lord had spoken. \u201cWhen Pharaoh does not heed you\u201d (7:4).
\nRASHBAM
\nThis is the finger of God! This is a natural calamity, not a trick performed by these two. If it had been performed by magic, we could have done it ourselves.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThis is the finger of God! The exclamation point is misleading; see OJPS. They meant, This plague was performed by the God of the world, not by Moses, for it affected animals as well as humans. They told Pharaoh, \u201cThis plague has nothing to do with Israel; it is a divine blow based on the astrological position of the star of Egypt\u201d\u2014an \u201cact of God\u201d in the sense of a chance occurrence. The Philistines used a similar expression when they set the Ark on an unmanned cart harnessed to two milch cows and turned them loose: \u201cIf it goes up the road to Beth-shemesh, to [God\u2019s] own territory, it was He who has inflicted this great harm on us. But if not, we shall know that it was not His hand that struck us; it just happened to us by chance\u201d (1 Sam. 6:9). As I have already pointed out in my comments to 3:15 and 5:2, Pharaoh and his courtiers did not deny the Creator, merely the Lord whom Moses had announced to them (which is why He hardened Pharaoh\u2019s heart). Note that they say \u201cthe finger of God,\u201d not of the Lord. Since this plague was not announced, as those of the pestilence and the frogs were, they did not connect it with Moses or the Lord. Remember that in the plague of frogs, Pharaoh did say to Moses, \u201cPlead with the Lord\u201d (8:4).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThis is the finger of God! According to Ibn Ezra, this means that it was an astrologically determined disaster, having nothing to do with Israel; see his comment for the reasoning behind this notion. But I do not think he is correct. For one thing, something that happened by chance would not be called \u201cthe finger of God.\u201d Rather, a plague of punishment is regularly called \u201cthe hand of the Lord\u201d or \u201cthe finger of God,\u201d as in the very verse he brings for proof: \u201cit was not His hand that struck us\u201d (1 Sam. 6:9). Notice, moreover, that this is the last time the magicians confront Moses. What it really means is just what it sounds like: When the magicians could not do the same as Aaron, they acknowledged that it was God\u2019s doing. This is why Pharaoh did not summon them again. And they called it \u201cthe finger of God\u201d rather than \u201cthe hand of God\u201d to try to minimize it. They did not say \u201cLord\u201d merely because that was Moses\u2019 terminology, not theirs. The fact that they were unable to produce lice was due to deliberate interference by God, demonstrating that everything was His, and in His power. I also think that the reason they failed this time was that they were unable to actually create anything. To make blood, they merely changed the nature of the water; and note that the text does not say that they created frogs, merely that they \u201cbrought frogs\u201d (v. 3) that were already in existence. But no one could actually \u201cproduce\u201d lice out of dust other than the Blessed Creator. As far as Ibn Ezra\u2019s insistence that they did not connect this plague with Israel, it seems obvious to me that Aaron did what he did in Pharaoh\u2019s presence, just as Moses later did with the soot (9:10). The difference was that God did not warn Pharaoh in advance about the lice, for He did this only with the plagues that caused death to human beings, as even the frogs (see Ps. 78:45, which our Sages, based on Lev. 22:25, take as referring to castration) and locusts (by creating famine) might have done. For God insists upon warning the wicked when they are in danger; see Ezek. 33:9. Thus He warned Pharaoh about the pestilence, but not about the lice, boils, or darkness\u2014for his intent was to spare him (see 9:16).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nPharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened. The lice came from dust, but there was none in his palace, which had marble floors; and the poor were used to them (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 8:16\u201318
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is the plague of insects (vv. 16\u201320), like those of pestilence and the slaying of the first-born, performed without the use of the rod and not by Moses or Aaron?
\n\u2666 Why does \u201cI will set apart the region of Goshen\u201d (v. 18) intervene between the plague and the promise \u201cthat you may know\u201d? It should really come in the middle of v. 19.
\nExodus 8:16
\nIBN EZRA
\nAs he is coming out to the water. It is the custom of kings to go out in the morning to the river, for seeing the water is good for the eyes.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nEarly in the morning \u2026 as he is coming out to the water. A comparable phrase is used with several of the plagues. The straightforward explanation is that it was at this time, when kings go down to play in the water, that the Holy One commanded Moses to approach him. With the blood, since it was the first plague, God wanted Moses to do it fearlessly and in Pharaoh\u2019s presence. \u201cStation yourself before him\u201d (7:15; OJPS \u201cthou shalt stand before him\u201d) implies defiance. Similarly here; OJPS \u201cstand before Pharaoh\u201d is closer to the Hebrew than NJPS \u201cpresent yourself to Pharaoh.\u201d Though 9:15, before the plague of hail, does not say so explicitly, that took place when Pharaoh went out to the water as well. Since the swarms and the hail involved human punishment and death, the Holy One wanted them to take place before the eyes of all. For most of the people would follow the king down to the water. Moses warned him before their eyes, hoping they would plead with their lord to turn back from his evil way. If they did not, they too would have earned their punishment. But with the other plagues merely warning the king was enough: \u201cGo to Pharaoh\u201d (7:26, frogs; 9:1, animal pestilence; 10:1, locusts)\u2014to the palace. This did not occur with the lice and the boils, since Aaron had to be outside to strike the dust (a king\u2019s floors are alabaster and marble, not dirt) and Moses had to be outside to throw the soot into the sky. These two were performed in Pharaoh\u2019s presence while he was in the palace garden, or somewhere like that.
\nExodus 8:17
\nRASHI
\nI will let loose \u2026 against you. I will incite them, I will sic them on you. Swarms of insects. Certainly not just \u201cflies,\u201d as OJPS has it. The word implies a mixture of snakes and scorpions and all kinds of evil creatures that would cause devastation among them. There is a certain logic to the midrash in Tanhuma that explains each plague according to the axioms of military strategy for besieging a city. First you destroy the water supply (the plague of blood). Then you barrage them with loud noises in order to frighten them and create confusion. This was achieved by the croaking of the frogs.
\nRASHBAM
\nSwarms of insects. I think these \u201cswarms\u201d (arov) are really swarms of wolves. Note that \u201cthe wolf of the desert\u201d (Jer. 5:6) is ze\u2019ev aravot, and the \u201cwolves of the steppe\u201d (Zeph. 3:3) are z\u2019evei erev. Grammatically arov is the adjectival form of erev, \u201csteppe.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nLet loose. The same verb as \u201clet go\u201d earlier in the verse, but used in an unusual conjugation. Swarms of insects. Ps. 78:45 \u201cto devour them\u201d confirms that the NJPS \u201cinsects\u201d is correct; \u201cflies\u201d of OJPS is too specific, since etymologically the word arov implies a \u201cmixture\u201d of species. The very ground. Even in unsettled areas, where there were no houses.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSwarms of insects. Rather, of beasts like wolves and foxes, to eat up all of their food (Gersonides).
\nExodus 8:18
\nRASHI
\nThat you may know that I the Lord am in the midst of the land. Even though My Shekhinah, My Presence, is in heaven, My decree is carried out in the lower worlds.
\nRASHBAM
\nOn that day I will set apart. Since the wild beasts could easily go through the whole kingdom once the plague was unleashed, it was more necessary with this plague than the others to emphasize the separation between the Israelites and the Egyptians. The same is true of the pestilence, as noted in 9:4.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will set apart the region \u2026 where My people dwell. It was obviously this setting apart that was responsible for Pharaoh\u2019s first concession (see 8:21). Once he saw that God had made a distinction between the Israelites and the Egyptians, he feared to do them any evil. He realized that he had to let them go and sacrifice, lest he be struck by pestilence. You see that he now gives them permission to sacrifice within the land (v. 21). I the Lord am in the midst of the land. The metaphor is that of a king, for the custom of kings is to stay in the middle of their kingdom in order to be equidistant from all points on the borders. Similarly, God created the human heart, the king of the body, in its center. He also created the human spirit in the center of the body: \u201cthe Lord, Who \u2026 created man\u2019s breath in the middle of him\u201d (Zech. 12:1). There are many proofs of this from nature. Moreover, this explains \u201cFrom Zion, perfect in beauty, God appeared\u201d (Ps. 50:2)\u2014for Zion is in the middle of the inhabited world, and it is in the inhabited world that God\u2019s kingdom appears.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will set apart the region of Goshen. The original plagues simply stayed where they were, so it was no miracle that they affected Egypt and not Goshen. But this was the kind of plague that spreads. When the lions came out of their dens and the leopards down from their mountains, it would be natural for them to go to Goshen as well, which after all was a region of Egypt. Thus God had to make explicit that all of Goshen would be spared on account of His people, who made up the majority there. I the Lord am in the midst of the land. Ibn Ezra likens this to a king in the middle of his kingdom. But this makes no sense. It is to say that He is the ruler and keeps an eye on everything, against the opinion of those who think, \u201cThe clouds screen Him so He cannot see as He moves about the circuit of heaven\u201d (Job 22:14). Or \u201cin the midst\u201d may have to do with \u201cI am sending an angel before you \u2026 My Name is in him\u201d (23:20\u201321)\u2014literally, \u201cin his midst.\u201d This is a lofty and esoteric mystery.
\nExodus 8:19\u201322
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does v. 19 repeat the assertion that the Israelites will not be harmed by the plague?
\n\u2666 Why is the timing (\u201ctomorrow,\u201d v. 19) of this plague announced, when it was not for the previous plagues?
\n\u2666 Why does the plague of insects, unlike any of the previous plagues, include the phrase \u201cAnd the Lord did so\u201d (v. 20)? Would one expect God to say something and not do it?
\n\u2666 What got into Pharaoh to propose that they sacrifice \u201cwithin the land\u201d (v. 21)?
\nExodus 8:19
\nRASHI
\nA distinction. A separation between My people and your people.
\nRASHBAM
\nA distinction. That is, a separation. \u201cSalvation,\u201d \u201crescue,\u201d \u201cremoval,\u201d and \u201ctearing away\u201d are all words that similarly convey a sense of separation and distinction. Tomorrow this sign shall come to pass. I am naming the time so that you cannot pass it off as a coincidence.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will make a distinction. This too will be a sign within a sign: for the swarms to be able to distinguish between My people and your people.\u2014The \u201cdistinction\u201d applies to those of the Israelites who were living among the Egyptians, not those who lived separately in Goshen, which was \u201cset apart\u201d in v. 18.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will make a distinction between My people and your people. Even within Egypt, if the animals found a Jew, they would eat the Egyptians but not harm him: \u201cHe inflicted upon them swarms of beasts to devour them\u201d (Ps. 78:45). The word used here for \u201cdistinction\u201d comes from the root that means \u201cto redeem\u201d; note Isa. 43:3, \u201cI give Egypt as a ransom for you, Ethiopia and Saba in exchange for you.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA distinction between My people and your people. In Goshen, where Egyptians also lived (Gersonides). The etymology of the word, from the verb \u201credeem,\u201d implies that from this moment the Israelites ceased to serve the Egyptians as slaves (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 8:20
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord did so. The next day, as Moses had decreed. Heavy swarms of insects invaded. Of their own accord. This plague was more severe than any of the previous ones.
\nExodus 8:21
\nRASHI
\nWithin the land. In your own place\u2014not in the wilderness.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh summoned Moses and Aaron. By now it was clear to Pharaoh that the plagues were coming because the Israelites had not sacrificed to God. Within the land. Within his kingdom, not somewhere else.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWithin the land. After all, Moses has made a point of telling him (8:18) that God is \u201cin the midst of the land\u201d (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 8:22
\nRASHI
\nThat which is untouchable to the Egyptians. Literally, with OJPS, \u201cthe abomination of the Egyptians.\u201d Following 2 Kings 23:13, this means, \u201cthat which the Egyptians worship\u201d\u2014which the Israelites consider abomination. In other words, the sacrifice we are performing is anathema to the Egyptians, because we are sacrificing what they worship. Will they not stone us! It should be punctuated with a question mark, as in OJPS.
\nRASHBAM
\nUntouchable to the Egyptians. For sheep were an abomination to the Egyptians. Will they not stone us! It should be punctuated with a question mark. The stoning would be a sign of contempt, as happened to David on his way out of Jerusalem after Absalom seized power: \u201cShimei walked alongside on the slope of the hill, insulting him as he walked, and throwing stones at him and flinging dirt\u201d (2 Sam. 16:13).
\nIBN EZRA
\nUntouchable to the Egyptians. OJPS \u201cthe abomination of the Egyptians\u201d is closer to the Hebrew. According to Jeshua b. Judah, Moses wrote it this way in the Torah to insult idolatry; to Pharaoh, he said only, \u201cthe gods of the Egyptians.\u201d Jeshua adds that their gods were in the form of a ram (because they thought that Aries the ram was the astrological sign that ruled Egypt), and hence they would not eat meat. But why would this prevent them from eating the meat of an ox or a kid? In my opinion, the Egyptians of Moses\u2019 time shared the opinion of the people of India\u2014who, like the Egyptians, are Hamites to a man, and who make up more than half the population of the world\u2014who do not eat meat to this day. Nor do they eat blood, milk, fish, or eggs\u2014in short, anything that comes from an animal. And they are disgusted by anyone who does. Shepherding is a despised profession among them. Note Gen. 46:34: \u201cAll shepherds are abhorrent to Egyptians.\u201d To this day, they will not let anyone eat meat in their land. If one of them goes to a foreign country, he flees any place where meat is eaten, nor will he eat anything that flesh food has touched; they consider vessels that have contained meat unclean. Note Gen. 43:32, \u201cthe Egyptians could not dine with the Hebrews, since that would be abhorrent to the Egyptians.\u201d Potiphar, moreover, \u201cleft all that he had in Joseph\u2019s hands and \u2026 paid attention to nothing save the food that he ate\u201d (Gen. 39:6). He would not let Joseph touch that, because he was a Hebrew. Don\u2019t bother to ask why (if this is true) the Egyptians had cattle, for the Hindus have cattle too\u2014horses, asses, and camels to ride and as beasts of burden; cattle for plowing; and sheep for wool. I will return to this subject in my comment to 12:7. Will they not stone us! Japheth b. Ali thinks this phrase should be a question (and that the letter indicating a question was simply left out). But in fact the unusual word used here for \u201cif\u201d (hen) is the question word: \u201cIsn\u2019t it so that if we sacrifice \u2026 they will stone us?\u201d
\nExodus 8:23\u201328
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Once Moses made clear that they had to go three days\u2019 journey into the wilderness, why would Pharaoh tell them, \u201cDo not go very far\u201d (v. 24)? Such a large group could not travel far in three days.
\nExodus 8:23
\nIBN EZRA
\nA distance of three days. We must go far away from the Egyptians. As He may command us. Which animals we must sacrifice, and how many of each.
\nExodus 8:24
\nIBN EZRA
\nPlead \u2026 for me. \u201cThen\u201d is added by the NJPS; in fact, this phrase ought to have come first in the verse\u2014plead for me that this plague be withdrawn, and then I will let you go to sacrifice in the wilderness as you asked, on condition that you not go farther than three days away.
\nExodus 8:25
\nIBN EZRA
\nLet not Pharaoh again act deceitfully. Rather, \u201clet Pharaoh not jest again.\u201d Moses said this because Pharaoh had promised to let them go if the frogs were removed, but he didn\u2019t.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nTomorrow. Just as Pharaoh had asked for the frogs to be removed \u201ctomorrow,\u201d Moses wanted to do the same in this case. But notice that, unlike the frogs, the swarms of animals did not die but were \u201cremoved\u201d (v. 27). Our Sages have explained the reason. God wanted everything about the plagues to be harmful and nothing beneficial. Moses was careful to say that the frogs would be \u201ccut off,\u201d but that the swarms would \u201cdepart.\u201d
\nExodus 8:26
\nRASHI
\nPleaded with the Lord. That is, he exerted himself greatly in prayer. The conjugation of the verb here differs from that in v. 25, where it means \u201cto pray a great deal.\u201d
\nExodus 8:27
\nRASHI
\nHe removed the swarms. But they did not die as the frogs did. For had they died the Egyptians would have been able to use their skins.
\nExodus 8:28
\nRASHBAM
\nPharaoh became stubborn this time also. As with the plague of frogs, he made himself stubborn; see my comment to 7:22.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh became stubborn. OJPS is more explicit: \u201cPharaoh hardened his heart\u201d himself. This makes clear that it was also Pharaoh doing it in v. 11, after the plague of frogs.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWould not let the people go. It was a great reproach to the kingdom for the king not to do as he had promised (Gersonides).
\nExodus 9:1\u20137
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does the text say that God \u201cfixed the time\u201d (v. 5) for the plague of pestilence?
\n\u2666 How is it that Pharaoh did not ask for relief from the plague of pestilence?
\nExodus 9:1
\nIBN EZRA
\nGo to Pharaoh. To his palace. Judah Halevi says, Two plagues involved water: the blood and the frogs. Two involved earth: the lice and the swarms (see Gen. 1:24, \u201cLet the earth bring forth every kind of living creature\u201d). Two involved air: the pestilence (which is nothing but unusually cold or hot air; yet countless people can die at a single moment because the spirit of all life, which is in the heart, depends on the air) and the boils (which were caused by throwing dust into the air). The seventh, hail, was a mixture of the sphere of storm and the sphere of fire (see v. 24, \u201cfire flashing in the midst of the hail\u201d). The eighth, locusts, came from afar on the wind. The ninth was a miraculous plague, by which the light of the sun, moon, and stars disappeared from Egypt. The tenth was the descent of the Destroyer from the spheres of glory to kill the first-born.
\nExodus 9:3
\nRASHI
\nThe hand of the Lord will strike. OJPS is more literal here: \u201cthe hand of the Lord is upon thy cattle.\u201d This form is the rare participle of the verb \u201cto be.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nPestilence. This is a generic term, not the name of a specific disease.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYour livestock in the fields. This was simply an expression; the pestilence killed livestock that was in the barns as well: \u201call the livestock of the Egyptians died\u201d (v. 6). And it may be that, because the Egyptians hated all \u201cbreeders of livestock\u201d (Gen. 46:34), they kept them all out of inhabited areas, except when they needed horses to ride or donkeys as beasts of burden.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe hand of the Lord. The \u201chand\u201d represents God\u2019s might (Kimhi). Pestilence. From eating the grass on which the swarms of reptiles had left their poison (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:4
\nRASHI
\nWill make a distinction. A separation.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA distinction between the livestock of Israel and the livestock of the Egyptians. Since they were kept far from Egypt, in the fields near Goshen, the livestock of the two peoples was mixed there. Perhaps the pestilence was airborne, in which case it ought to have affected every animal in the district. Hence God had to perform a miracle to prevent this.
\nExodus 9:5
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord has fixed the time. So that they would not think it a natural calamity.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord has fixed the time. For the beginning of the plague.
\nExodus 9:6
\nIBN EZRA
\nAll the livestock of the Egyptians. \u201cAll\u201d is exaggerated, as in \u201cSo all the world came to Joseph in Egypt\u201d (Gen. 41:57). It means \u201cmost.\u201d Notice that there is still livestock left to be killed by the hail (v. 19). Similarly, \u201call\u201d the trees were shattered by the hail (v. 25), yet some were still left to be devoured by the locusts (10:5).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAll the livestock of the Egyptians died. Rather, \u201call the livestock that died was of the Egyptians.\u201d Rashi thinks only the cattle in the fields died, while those who feared God were able to protect their livestock; see his comment to v. 10. But v. 21 tells us that \u201cthose who paid no regard to the word of the Lord\u201d still had livestock to lose to the hail (Bekhor Shor). Indeed, all the livestock of the Egyptians died. But subsequently they bought more: from foreigners within the land, and imported from outside it (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:7
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh inquired \u2026 yet Pharaoh remained stubborn. Even knowing that the plague had not affected the Israelites, he still would not let them go. Perhaps it was because this plague did not last very long.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nPharaoh remained stubborn. He had no need to ask for relief, since the affected animals were already dead (Bekhor Shor). He remained stubborn even though the fact that none of the Israelites\u2019 livestock died could not possibly be a coincidence. Again, they must have asked at this point that he let the people go. For the only purpose of the plagues was to get the Israelites out of Egypt (Gersonides).
\nExodus 9:8\u201312
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why are both Moses and Aaron told (v. 8) to perform the plague of boils?
\n\u2666 Why do Moses and Aaron both take handfuls of soot (v. 10) if only Moses threw it in the air?
\n\u2666 Why was the plague of boils brought on with soot, as if it were something natural and not miraculous?
\n\u2666 How did they have any beasts left after the plague of pestilence?
\n\u2666 How is it that the magicians were \u201cunable to confront Moses\u201d (v. 11), when they must have been just as affected by earlier plagues?
\n\u2666 Why does God stiffen Pharaoh\u2019s heart this time (v. 12), something that is apparently not done by God in the previous plagues?
\nExodus 9:8
\nRASHI
\nSoot. The Hebrew word is derived from the root meaning \u201cto blow,\u201d for wind blows the particles of soot around. Let Moses throw it. In order to throw something forcefully, it must be thrown with one hand. Thus several miracles were involved in this plague: first, that Moses could hold in one fist not only his own double handful but also that of Aaron; second, that the dust went \u201call over the land of Egypt\u201d (v. 9).
\nRASHBAM
\nSoot. Piah, a thin dust that blows (mitnape\u2019ah) around in the air.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSoot from the kiln. Which rises upward. It is black, condensed smoke.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHandfuls of soot. Two handfuls of soot could not cause boils over the whole of Egypt; the boils came of themselves. But God prefers to make His miracles look as natural as possible. Thus He showed Moses how to sweeten the water with a piece of wood (15:25) and to cure snakebite with the figure of a seraph, both of which He could have done without using props (Bekhor Shor). Each man\u2019s double handful meant a total of four handfuls, meaning there was one handful for Moses to throw in each of the four cardinal directions (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:9
\nRASHI
\nBoils. The word so translated literally means \u201cheat.\u201d It is common in rabbinic Hebrew.
\nRASHBAM
\nBreaking out. Producing pustules full of suppuration and moisture.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIt shall become a fine dust. This part of it, too, was a miracle\u2014for a small amount of soot to cover the whole kingdom of Egypt. Throughout the land of Egypt. Affecting the Israelites as well.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA fine dust all over the land of Egypt. According to our Sages, dust from this soot came down throughout Egypt, raising boils and pustules on man and beast all over the land of Egypt, for it was burning hot. The wind might blow dust even into the houses, so there would be nowhere to escape from it. And this is correct. For in time of drought, dust comes down with the dew: \u201cThe Lord will make the rain of your land dust\u201d (Deut. 28:24). But straightforwardly, it may simply have been that the dust that was made out of the soot in that particular location polluted the air throughout Egypt in such a way as to produce boils, by decree of the Most High.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nInflammation. Pharaoh could easily dismiss the loss of cattle, thinking, \u201cIt\u2019s only money. And besides, every animal dies eventually.\u201d So God based the next plague on the notion of Job 2:4, \u201cSkin for skin\u2014all that a man has he will give up for his life\u201d (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:10
\nRASHI
\nOn man and beast. If you are wondering how they had any beasts left after \u201call the livestock of the Egyptians died\u201d (v. 6), remember that only the livestock \u201cin the fields\u201d (v. 3) were to be affected by the pestilence. All who feared the word of God rushed the livestock into their houses. See the explanation in the Mekilta to 14:7, about how animals were found to pull Pharaoh\u2019s chariots when he chased the Israelites.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey took soot of the kiln. Double handfuls, as instructed in v. 8. Moses threw it. Moses threw all of it, including what Aaron had taken.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nOn man and beast. \u201cAll who feared the word of God.\u2026\u201d is Rashi\u2019s explanation\u2014it is not in the text (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 9:11
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe inflammation affected the magicians. This might indicate that although the magicians were not affected by the frogs or the swarms (having found a scientific way to get themselves some relief), their wisdom did not help them this time.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe magicians were unable to confront Moses. They were shamed and humiliated, being covered with boils. They could not even save themselves, so there was no point in their coming to the king\u2019s palace, or confronting Moses outdoors. They remained shut up at home.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMagicians. The term is actually not generic, but represents one of the kinds of magicians; it is used with other terms at Dan. 2:2 (Kimhi).
\nExodus 9:12
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord stiffened the heart of Pharaoh. This time, God stiffened Pharaoh\u2019s heart, which explains why he did not plead for relief; and perhaps this plague too did not last very long. We should not assume that every plague lasted seven days just because the first one did. We must pursue the meaning of the text! It is well known that the pestilence lasted just for an hour and the plague of darkness for three days (10:23). Hence we have no way of knowing in what month Moses came to Pharaoh and the plagues began. Only if there were a tradition about this among our holy Sages would we accept and heed it.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord stiffened the heart of Pharaoh. It may be that it was the magicians who stiffened his heart during the first plagues, to glorify themselves before him by their wisdom. But now they did not come before him. In his folly, there was no one to help him or come to his aid; he was \u201ctrapped in his iniquities\u201d (Prov. 5:22). Or it may suggest the explanation of our Sages; see my comment to 7:3. And this is the Truth.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe would not heed them. Assuming that, like an ordinary inflammation, it would heal on its own (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 9:13\u201317
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God refer to the plague of hail as \u201call my plagues\u201d (v. 14)?
\nExodus 9:13
\nIBN EZRA
\nEarly in the morning present yourself to Pharaoh. Stand in his way. The text does not say that he would be going down to the water; perhaps he had to leave the city for some festive occasion or for some other purpose.
\nExodus 9:14
\nRASHI
\nAll My plagues. From this we learn that the plague of hail was equivalent to all the other plagues combined.
\nRASHBAM
\nMy plagues. Various kinds of damage and assault: fire, hail, lumps of ice, sulfur, snow, and smoke.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAll My plagues. The thunder, hail, rain, and fire all together. Upon your person, and your courtiers. To make you and your courtiers frightened, which you have not been up to now. There is none like Me in all the world. The Egyptians believed that their gods were comparable in power.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThis time I will send all my plagues. Enough to finally make him fear (Gersonides). \u201cThis time\u201d means \u201cduring this last set of plagues that is meant to prove My power\u201d (Abarbanel). Upon your person. Literally, \u201cat your heart,\u201d specifically implying the last plague in the set, the killing of the first-born (Abarbanel). There is none like me in all the world. For some of the heavenly beings derived from God have power over some aspects of the world; but not one of them has power over all the world as He does (Gersonides).
\nExodus 9:15\u201316
\nRASHBAM
\nI could have stretched forth My hand. When the pestilence struck the beasts, my intention was to have it strike you and your people as well. You would have been effaced from the earth. But I have spared you for this purpose: in order to show you My power. To make you know how foolish you were to say \u201cI do not know the Lord\u201d (5:2).
\nExodus 9:15
\nRASHI
\nI could have stretched forth My hand when I struck your livestock (vv. 3,6) and stricken you and your people along with them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWith pestilence. Rather, \u201cwith the pestilence\u201d that killed your cattle. I could have killed all of you with it as well.
\nExodus 9:16
\nRASHI
\nThat My fame may resound. Rather, \u201cin order for you to make my fame resound.\u201d See my comment to 12:29.
\nIBN EZRA
\nFor this purpose. The Hebrew says only \u201cfor this,\u201d which Japhet b. Ali interprets to mean \u201cfor this plague.\u201d This fits the midrashic interpretation, \u201cI have preserved you for this plague \u2026 in order to have you, Pharaoh, make My fame resound.\u201d But it actually means what the translations say. Pharaoh did not (as a midrash says) survive to make God\u2019s fame resound, but drowned in the sea, as I shall make abundantly clear in my comment to 14:28.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThat My fame may resound. And \u201chold many back from iniquity\u201d (Mal. 2:6) (Sforno).
\nExodus 9:17
\nRASHI
\nYou continue to thwart My people. Following Onkelos, \u201cyou have continued to suppress My people.\u201d OJPS \u201cexaltest\u201d is based on the idea that the root of the verb means \u201cto be high.\u201d Thus NJPS translates mesillah of Isa. 11:16, from the same root, as \u201chighway.\u201d But what it really means is a road that is \u201cpressed down,\u201d that is, paved.
\nRASHBAM
\nThwart. Rather, you \u201cpress\u201d them into slavery.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou continue to thwart My people. There is a dispute about the correct meaning of the verb. The OJPS rendering, \u201cAs yet exaltest thou thyself against My people,\u201d apparently understands it as a reflexive verb from the root \u05e1\u05dc\u05dc meaning \u201cto be high.\u201d \u201cThwart\u201d of NJPS seems to be based on the understanding of Ibn Janah that the verb means \u201cto strengthen oneself.\u201d To me, the most plausible translation is \u201cyou extol yourself against My people,\u201d following the use of the root in Ps. 68:5, \u201cextol Him who rides the clouds.\u201d In other words, \u201cyou continue to praise yourself, declaring that your heart is mighty and that God will not be able to force you to let His people go.\u201d
\nExodus 9:18\u201324
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God tell them to bring everything under shelter (v. 19)? Had they all obeyed, the plague would not have affected them at all and it would have been pointless!
\n\u2666 Why does v. 24 essentially repeat v. 18?
\nExodus 9:18
\nRASHI
\nThis time tomorrow. He scratched a line on the wall: \u201cWhen the sun reaches this line tomorrow, the hail will begin to fall.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will rain down. It is well known that even today hail and rain simply do not fall on Egypt; there is no need to explain why. The same is true to this very day in other places. For this reason, the Egyptians were greatly afraid, for nothing heavier than dew had ever fallen there.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nSuch as has not been in Egypt from the day it was founded. This is repeated in another form later: \u201csuch as had not fallen on the land of Egypt since it had become a nation\u201d (v. 24). Thus we learn that this kind of hail does fall elsewhere in the world, e.g., at Gibeon \u201cthe Lord hurled huge stones on them from the sky\u201d (Josh. 11:10) and at Sodom, \u201csulfurous fire from the Lord out of heaven\u201d (Gen. 19:24). But in Egypt, where even rain does not fall\u2014let alone hail\u2014this was a great wonder. I do not understand the midrashic statement to the contrary.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nFrom the day it was founded. As is well known, Egypt was at one time completely underwater, which is why it is so flat. The remains of fish have been dug up from the ground there (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:19
\nRASHI
\nOrder \u2026 under shelter. Literally, with OJPS, \u201csend, hasten in.\u201d The same verb is used in Isa. 10:31 and Jer. 6:1 to mean \u201cseek refuge.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nOrder \u2026 under shelter. This verb means something like \u201cgather them\u201d or \u201cmake them flee.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nOrder \u2026 under shelter. To save the lives of the people tending the animals. As Pirke Avot says, \u201cBeloved is humanity, for it was created in the image of God\u201d (Sforno). I think these are not God\u2019s words, but those of Moses, warning Pharaoh as one might a friend (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:20
\nRASHI
\nBrought \u2026 to safety. More literally, with OJPS, \u201cmade his servants and his cattle flee.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThose \u2026 who feared the Lord\u2019s word. According to the midrash, this was Job. But in my opinion Job lived at an earlier period. Brought their slaves and livestock indoors. That very day.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThose \u2026 who feared the Lord\u2019s word. Everything that precedes this is God\u2019s speech to Moses. This verse shows clearly that he repeated God\u2019s words to Pharaoh, but the text does not bother to include this repetition. The purpose of this plague was to destroy the crops, not to harm human beings, and God in His mercy \u201cshows sinners the way\u201d to save themselves (Ps. 25:8).
\nExodus 9:22
\nRASHI
\nToward the sky. Literally, \u201cover the sky,\u201d prompting a midrash that God lifted Moses up above the sky.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHold out your arm. It is obvious that this means, \u201chold out the rod,\u201d as indeed Moses does in v. 23. Toward the sky. In the air.
\nExodus 9:23
\nIBN EZRA
\nFire streamed down to the ground. Against its essential nature, which is to rise up in the air.
\nExodus 9:24
\nRASHI
\nFlashing in the midst of the hail. A miracle within a miracle\u2014fire mixed with hail, which is made of water. Yet to do the will of their Creator they made peace between them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nFire flashing in the midst of the hail. A wonder within the wonder, something not found in nature\u2014opposites mixed up together.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe hail was very heavy\u2014fire flashing in the midst of the hail. The hail fell at such high speed that it both heated up the air and created thunder (Sforno).
\nExodus 9:25\u201329
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does Pharaoh say he is guilty \u201cthis time\u201d (v. 27), when he was clearly just as guilty the whole time?
\n\u2666 Why the change from God\u2019s announced purpose in v. 14, \u201cthat you may know that there is none like Me in all the world,\u201d to Moses\u2019, \u201cthat you may know that the earth is the Lord\u2019s\u201d (v. 29)?
\n\u2666 Moses must have told Pharaoh (in vv. 29\u201330) that his prayer could not help the flax and barley (which had already been destroyed, v. 31), but only the wheat and the emmer. Why is this not explained more clearly?
\nExodus 9:25
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe hail struck down all that were in the open. This was a severe plague, even if it did not strike down \u201call,\u201d but merely most. It killed man and beast and destroyed trees. God had taken pity on them and their cattle and told Moses to warn them in advance (v. 19), but Moses did not mention this to Pharaoh\u2014having seen that already Pharaoh \u201cfound that not a head of the livestock of Israel had died; yet Pharaoh remained stubborn\u201d (v. 7).
\nExodus 9:26
\nNAHMANIDES
\nOnly in the region of Goshen. Since Moses held out his hand to the sky to inaugurate this miracle, the hail ought to have fallen on Goshen too\u2014Egypt and Goshen have the same air. So the text points out that Goshen was spared, because that was where the Israelites were.
\nExodus 9:27
\nRASHBAM
\nI stand guilty this time. This time I admit that I am guilty.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI stand guilty. Seeing \u201call My plagues\u201d (v. 14)\u2014marvels within marvels\u2014Pharaoh and his courtiers were petrified with terror that they would be stricken with pestilence, as Moses had threatened them (v. 15).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI stand guilty this time. This time I admit to the Lord that He is in the right and that my people and I have rebelled against His word all along up until now.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThis time. Having been convinced of God\u2019s existence and providence, I ought not to have doubted His power (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:28
\nRASHI
\nThat there may be an end. OJPS \u201clet there be enough\u201d is more literal, but not quite accurate. What he meant was that what God had already sent down was enough for him.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPlead with the Lord. Pharaoh acknowledged Israel\u2019s God by using His personal name, but then said God\u2019s thunder since, as I have already mentioned, he had always acknowledged the existence of God. But because Pharaoh did not say, \u201cThe Lord\u2019s thunder,\u201d Moses deliberately combined the two names and told him, \u201cI know that you and your courtiers do not yet fear the Lord God\u201d (v. 30), to make clear that the Lord alone is God. You will not find Moses using the expression \u201cthe Lord God\u201d anywhere else in the Torah. Notice that \u201cO Lord god\u201d of Deut. 3:24 is capitalized differently, since in Hebrew this is not the Tetragrammaton plus \u201cGod\u201d but the word \u201clord\u201d plus the Tetragrammaton. I have already explained to you the differences between the names of God in my comments to 3:15.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGod\u2019s thunder. That is, \u201cthis mighty thunder,\u201d as \u201cthe high mountains\u201d in Ps. 36:7 are literally \u201cGod\u2019s mountains\u201d (Gersonides).
\nExodus 9:29
\nRASHI
\nAs I go out of the city. Better OJPS, \u201cas soon as I am gone out of the city.\u201d He could not pray within the city because it was full of idols.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAs I go out of the city. He would not pray inside the city because of its gods. So that you may know that the earth is the Lord\u2019s. And not yours.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAs I go out of the city. The straightforward explanation of this might be that ordinarily Moses would pray at home, but this time he wanted to pray outside so he could stretch his hands out to the heavens and have the thunder and rain stop immediately\u2014which he could not do in the city because of the idols that defiled it. Note v. 33, \u201cLeaving Pharaoh, Moses went outside the city and spread out his hands to the Lord,\u201d while previously (by contrast), in 8:26, Moses merely \u201cleft Pharaoh\u2019s presence and pleaded with the Lord.\u201d But according to our Sages, because the city was full of idols, Moses could not even pray there, let alone have God speak with him. If this is so, we must assume that the difference this time is that, because Pharaoh wanted the hail to stop immediately, Moses had to make explicit that he needed to leave the city in order to pray\u2014something he did not bother to say the other times. And this is the Truth.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAs I go out of the city. Rather, \u201cas I go out from you to the city.\u201d Moses will pray within the city just as he did at 8:26 (Bekhor Shor). Proving that he was not afraid of the hail (Hizkuni). It is true that Moses could not pray in the city because it was full of idols. But he also had a little house outside of town where he could pray in seclusion. The house still exists, and the Jews of the place celebrate their festivals there (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:30\u201333
\nExodus 9:30
\nRASHI
\nYou and your courtiers do not yet fear the Lord. And as soon as there is some relief, you will hold fast to your degenerate ways.
\nRASHBAM
\nDo not yet fear. Rashi and NJPS are correct.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou and your courtiers do not yet fear. The word translated \u201cnot yet\u201d really means something like \u201cbefore.\u201d Hence Saadia takes vv. 31\u201332 as part of Moses speech: \u201cYou and your courtiers must know, before you fear the Lord, that the flax and barley are already ruined\u201d and so forth. Having promised to \u201cspread out my hands to the Lord\u201d in prayer, he was warning Pharaoh that by now there was nothing he could do for the flax or the barley. The two JPS translations follow the understanding of the Spanish grammarian Ibn Hayyuj that this word can mean \u201cnot yet.\u201d The same word is used in \u201cAre you not yet aware that Egypt is lost?\u201d (10:7). Rashi follows the same opinion, but the word is not used exactly as he thinks, since it is always followed by something that happens before something else. Here I believe it means, \u201cI know that at first you and your courtiers will fear God.\u201d That is, \u201cbefore I spread out my hands [to stop the thunder and hail] you will fear God.\u201d Out of politeness Moses did not add, \u201cbut after the thunder ceases you will not.\u201d Sure enough, \u201cwhen Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the thunder had ceased, he became stubborn and reverted to his guilty ways, as did his courtiers\u201d (v. 34).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYou and your courtiers do not yet fear the Lord. Ibn Ezra has properly criticized what Rashi says here, noting that it does not mean \u201cnot yet,\u201d as the translations have it, but \u201cbefore\u201d; see his comment. But in fact, the verse refers to the previous plagues, not just to this one: \u201cI know that before the plague departs you always fear the Lord, but that afterward you go back to flouting His commands. And I know that you will go on doing so.\u201d Notice that with the locust plague in ch. 10, Moses does not even bother to say this to Pharaoh, but prays to have the locusts removed with the intent that Pharaoh should go on sinning.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nDo not yet fear. It does not mean \u201cnot yet,\u201d but \u201cbefore\u201d\u2014before you let us go, you will fear God much more than you do now (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 9:31\u201332
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe flax and the barley were ruined. If this is the narrator speaking, then I don\u2019t know why these two verses were inserted at this point, before v. 33. It is reported that Saadia considered these two verses to be part of Moses\u2019 words to Pharaoh, warning him that it was too late to save the flax or the barley. But this explanation makes no sense to me. For the hail had \u201cstruck down all the grasses of the field and shattered all the trees of the field\u201d (v. 25). The wheat and the emmer were not hurt merely because they had not yet even sprouted, or perhaps were still so small that they had not blossomed. In which case, the hail might have gone on for a while longer without hurting them. But, in any case, there would be no need for Moses to tell Pharaoh what he had lost and what he hadn\u2019t. As soon as the hail stopped, he would find out on his own. In my view, this is Moses speaking to Pharaoh, but as follows: He had already told them that he knew they would revert to their foolish obstinacy once the plague ceased. Now he pointed out that they still had wheat and emmer to lose if they sinned against the Lord again. It was a hint that the locusts would \u201cdevour the surviving remnant that was left to you after the hail\u201d (10:5).
\nExodus 9:31
\nRASHI
\nRuined. This verb, and \u201churt\u201d of v. 32, are not the verb \u201cto strike\u201d (as OJPS \u201cwere smitten\u201d takes it), but a rare form that means \u201cbroken.\u201d The barley was in the ear. It ripens early and its stalks had already hardened; hence they broke and fell. Similarly the stalks of flax were already rigid enough to hold the buds. The word translated \u201cin the ear\u201d is also used to refer to the bud: \u201cI went down to the nut grove to see the budding of the vale\u201d (Song 6:11).
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe flax and barley were ruined. The translations are correct in taking this as part of the narration. In bud. This Hebrew word is found nowhere else in the Bible.
\nExodus 9:32
\nRASHI
\nThey ripen late. Hence they were still pliable and simply bent, but did not break, because of the hail. Despite the assertion of v. 25 that \u201cthe hail also struck down all the grasses of the field,\u201d we must understand this to mean only the grasses that already stood in their stalks and therefore could be struck down. In Midrash Tanhuma, some of our Sages disagreed with this, and interpret apilot, \u201cripen late,\u201d as if it came from pele, \u201cwonder\u201d: it was a wonder of wonders that they were not struck down.
\nRASHBAM
\nWere not hurt. To make clear that what the hail did not break, the locust consumed. The hail destroyed what was rigid, and the locusts ate what was soft.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey ripen late. Literally, \u201cthey were obscured.\u201d That is, they had not sprouted yet and were still hidden in the darkness underground.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe wheat and the emmer were not hurt. Letting Pharaoh know he still had something to lose (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 9:33
\nRASHI
\nNo rain came pouring down upon the earth. Even the raindrops that were in the air did not reach the earth. The verb translated \u201cpouring down\u201d literally means \u201cto reach,\u201d as in \u201cthe curse and the oath \u2026 have been poured down upon us\u201d (Dan. 9:11), that is, \u201chave reached us.\u201d Menahem b. Saruq classified it with the verb in Ezek. 22:22, \u201cas silver is melted in a crucible.\u201d And I find this plausible. See the Targum to 38:5 and 38:27, where the Hebrew verb \u201cto cast metal\u201d is translated by the Aramaic cognate of the Hebrew verb in our verse. Here too: the rain was not cast to the ground.
\nRASHBAM
\nPoured down. It means \u201cmelted down\u201d\u2014\u201cas silver is melted in a crucible\u201d (Ezek. 22:22). Rain no longer melted down to earth.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNo rain came pouring down upon the earth. Literally, \u201cno rain melted down.\u201d The same verb is used for the melting of silver in Ezek. 22:22.
\nExodus 9:34\u201335
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is the upshot of this plague both that Pharaoh becomes stubborn (v. 34) and that his heart stiffens (v. 35)? Earlier plagues say only one or the other; this one even adds, \u201che reverted to his guilty ways\u201d!
\nExodus 9:34
\nRASHBAM
\nReverted to his guilty ways. He did not \u201crevert\u201d; OJPS \u201che sinned yet more\u201d is better. Until the plague of hail, when he admitted, \u201cI and my people are in the wrong\u201d (v. 27), the text does not consider him as sinning deliberately; from that point on, it does.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe became stubborn. This makes clear Moses\u2019 meaning in v. 30. Reverted to his guilty ways. By contrast to his admission in v. 27, \u201cI stand guilty this time,\u201d which implied that he would be guilty no more.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe became stubborn. Knowing that no plague was repeated (Bekhor Shor). For the rain had ceased, even though Moses did not say anything about this (Hizkuni). As did his courtiers. This is said about them in no other plague; it matches the language of v. 30 (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 9:35
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh\u2019s heart stiffened. He had weakened, having been more frightened by this plague than any of the previous ones.
\nExodus 10:1\u20133
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does the plague of locusts begin a new weekly portion? It is not the beginning of the plagues or even of one of the three groups in R. Judah\u2019s acronym from the haggadah!
\n\u2666 God has previously commanded Moses, \u201cGo to Pharaoh.\u201d Why this time does he add, \u201cfor I have hardened his heart\u201d (v. 1) and the rest of this long explanation?
\n\u2666 The announced purpose of the previous plagues was always that Pharaoh and the Egyptians should know God. Why this time is it \u201cthat you [the Israelites] may know\u201d (v. 2)?
\nExodus 10:1
\nRASHI
\nGo to Pharaoh. And warn him.
\nRASHBAM
\nI have hardened his heart. We have not found the Holy One telling Moses in the case of any of the previous plagues that He had hardened Pharaoh\u2019s heart. But now Pharaoh has admitted that God was in the right and \u201cI and my people are in the wrong\u201d (9:27). Yet immediately afterward, Pharaoh \u201csinned yet more\u201d (9:34; see OJPS). Hence God was forced to say, I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his courtiers, showing that God is the subject of \u201chardened his heart\u201d (OJPS) in 9:34.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGo to Pharaoh. This last time, and don\u2019t be surprised that his heart has been hard\u2014for up to now I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his courtiers. God knew that the courtiers would weaken when the locusts arrived.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI have hardened his heart. The Holy One informs Moses that he has now hardened their hearts, after they had feared Him as a result of the hail and confessed their crimes. He explains His purpose in doing so: That I may display these My signs among them, which I desire to do so that the Egyptians will understand My might and so that you and all Israel may recount to future generations the power of My deeds, \u201cthat you may know that I am the Lord\u201d (v. 2) and that all that I desire, I accomplish, in heaven and on earth. The purpose of the hardening is not simply to punish them more.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo to Pharaoh. The Hebrew says not \u201cGo to Pharaoh\u201d but \u201cCome [with Me] to Pharaoh\u201d\u2014I will go with you (Bekhor Shor). The new weekly portion begins with this plague because at this point Pharaoh has begun to fear God. Formerly he was frightened only when a plague struck; from now on he is frightened when a plague is announced (Abarbanel). I have hardened his heart. Since Pharaoh had said, \u201cI will let you go; you need stay no longer\u201d (9:28), Moses assumed there would not have to be any more plagues (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 10:2
\nRASHI
\nThat you may recount. That you may recount it in the Torah for future generations. How I made a mockery of the Egyptians. As in Num. 22:29 or 1 Sam. 6:6. In the reflexive conjugation, the verb means \u201cmock\u201d; it is the intensive conjugation that implies performing an action, as in Lam. 1:12 and 1:22.
\nRASHBAM
\nMade a mockery. OJPS \u201cwhat I have wrought\u201d is to be preferred. The verb refers to the doing of deeds.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThat you may recount. Though grammatically singular, this is said not to Pharaoh but to Moses as representative of all Israel. It is they who are supposed to recount this, for at the end of the verse, \u201cyou\u201d (plural) are supposed to \u201cknow that I am the Lord.\u201d How I made a mockery of the Egyptians. This is anthropomorphic language, like a man who alters nature to take revenge on his enemies. This refers specifically to the plagues of lice and boils. My signs. The other plagues.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMade a mockery. I toy with him by hardening his heart and taking revenge on him. \u201cHe who is enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord mocks at them\u201d (Ps. 2:4). With this, the Holy One informs Moses that he should announce the plague of locusts to Pharaoh. Why else would God tell Moses Go to Pharaoh if he was not to say anything to him? But this is mentioned only in the words of Moses to Pharaoh and not here; the text has abridged it. The same thing happened with the plague of hail (9:13\u201321), only there God\u2019s speech to Moses was given, not Moses\u2019 to Pharaoh, as I have explained in my comment to 9:20. The reason is to avoid lengthy repetition; sometimes the one is omitted and sometimes the other. In Exodus Rabbah I have seen that you may recount in the hearing of your sons explained as follows: The Holy One informed Moses what plague He would bring upon the Egyptians, and Moses wrote down a coded reference to it: that you may recount in the hearing of your sons and of your sons\u2019 sons hints at the locusts, because it is a reminder of the locust plague in the book of Joel, where it is said, \u201cTell your children about it, and let your children tell theirs, and their children the next generation!\u201d (Joel 1:3).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI made a mockery of the Egyptians. Rather, \u201cI acted\u201d upon them\u2014that is, the text explains in human terms that God acted as if He were angry at them (Gersonides). That you may know. You and your descendants and the Egyptians (Sforno).
\nExodus 10:3
\nIBN EZRA
\nSo Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh. We know that Moses would not go to Pharaoh without Aaron, who was his spokesman. Aaron is mentioned specifically here because, unlike what happened with all the other plagues, in v. 8 the two of them are going to be brought back to Pharaoh and then, in v. 11, expelled from his presence. To humble yourself. The opposite of \u201cexaltest thou thyself\u201d (9:17, OJPS).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMoses and Aaron went to Pharaoh.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThus says the Lord. This is just one of many places in the Bible where God is quoted as saying something that we have not otherwise been told He said (Hizkuni). How long will you refuse to humble yourself? Instead you are priding yourself on \u201cthe surviving remnant that was left to you after the hail\u201d (v. 5)! (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 10:4\u20136
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why are we told that after announcing the plague of locusts Moses \u201cturned and left Pharaoh\u2019s presence\u201d (v. 6), a detail that occurs with no other plague?
\nExodus 10:4\u20135
\nNAHMANIDES
\nTomorrow I will bring locusts. The commentators have said that many days must have passed between the plague of hail and the plague of locusts, to produce all your trees that grow in the field. But in my opinion only a few days passed. It is well known that the judgment of the Egyptians did not continue for longer than a year; this can be determined from the fact that Moses was 80 when it began and died at 120 after 40 years in the wilderness. As we have learned in M. Eduy. 2:10, \u201cThe judgment of the Egyptians in Egypt lasted 12 months.\u201d Since the text says the surviving remnant that was left to you after the hail, no additional time was needed for more to grow. Later God tells Moses to summon the locusts to eat up \u201cwhatever the hail has left\u201d (v. 12). So it was the very same year. The hail, then, must have fallen no earlier than Adar. For the barley was in the ear, but the wheat was yet to ripen (9:31\u201332). So it would do no harm if the hail should strike as much of the wheat as had already grown, for it would grow again. The vines had not yet blossomed nor the trees budded. That is why the text says that the hail \u201cshattered all the trees of the field\u201d (9:25). It shattered the branches and the boughs. A month later, in Nisan, the wheat and the emmer sprouted. This was the surviving remnant that was left to you after the hail. The trees began to bud and the blossoms appeared; that is the meaning of your trees that grow in the field. The locust came and ate their buds, destroying every bud and blossom. In that very month the Israelites were redeemed. \u201cAll the fruit of the trees\u201d (v. 15) refers to the blossoms that produce fruit; for the result was \u201cthat nothing green was left.\u201d
\nExodus 10:4
\nIBN EZRA
\nLocusts. The Hebrew word arbeh is the name for a particular species of locust, perhaps because that species is more numerous (rab) than the other kinds. All four kinds are mentioned in Joel 1:4, but this kind is referred to (in Joel 2:25) as \u201cthe great army I let loose against you.\u201d So the aleph of the word must be a prefix, and the word itself is derived from the root \u05e8\u05d1\u05d4 (\u201cto be many\u201d).
\nExodus 10:5
\nRASHI
\nThe surface of the land. Literally, \u201cthe eye of the land,\u201d that is, its appearance.
\nRASHBAM
\nAll your trees that grow. For the hail had \u201cshattered all the trees of the field\u201d (9:25); the locusts would devour whatever grew afterward.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe surface of the land. Literally, \u201cthe eye of the land.\u201d Either it is a metaphor or it is meant to imply \u201cthe eyes of the inhabitants of the land\u201d; the subsequent phrase, \u201cno one will be able to see,\u201d is literally \u201che [unidentified] will not be able to see.\u201d That grow in the field. More literally, \u201cthat are growing.\u201d According to Japheth b. Ali, a long time had passed since the end of the plague of hail, so that trees could \u201cgrow in the field.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe surface of the land. Rashi is incorrect; the \u201ceye\u201d of the land is the sun. The locusts were so thick that they blocked the sunlight (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 10:6
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey shall fill. It is strange for the same Hebrew verb form to be both transitive and intransitive, as this one is. He turned and left Pharaoh\u2019s presence. Jeshua b. Judah thinks Moses \u201cturned\u201d to face Pharaoh and left walking backward, out of respect for the king. Japheth b. Ali thinks it means that Moses finished his business with the king, basing himself on Deut. 16:7, where \u201cturn\u201d means \u201cto start back.\u201d But what would either of them do with the earlier occasion when Moses \u201cturned this way and that\u201d (2:12)? Remember that panah, \u201cturned,\u201d is connected with panim, \u201cface.\u201d Pharaoh responded to what Moses said by remaining silent. When he finally turned to face Moses, he saw that Moses had left without his permission. (It goes without saying that Aaron went with him, but only Moses is mentioned since he is the main character. Similarly, in Gen. 22:19, the text says, \u201cAbraham then returned to his servants,\u201d not bothering to mention Isaac.) The proof that this analysis is correct is v. 8, \u201cMoses and Aaron were brought back to Pharaoh.\u201d He was angry that they had left without his permission.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHe turned and left Pharaoh\u2019s presence. Because they had been so afraid of the hail, Moses thought they would be afraid now too, that they would die\u2014of famine, if \u201cthe surviving remnant that was left\u201d (v. 5) should be destroyed. So he left without Pharaoh\u2019s permission and without waiting for him to answer yes or no, in order that Pharaoh and his courtiers might take counsel. It was a solid plan, for that is exactly what they did. The courtiers told Pharaoh, \u201cAre you not yet aware that Egypt is lost?\u201d (v. 7). According to our Sages, Moses saw that they were turning to each other, believing in his words, so he left in order that they might take counsel about how to repent. But I think that this is what he did every time he came to Pharaoh\u2019s palace. He would warn him and leave. The text mentions it here because Moses will be brought back to Pharaoh in v. 8.
\nExodus 10:7\u201310
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why doesn\u2019t Moses simply say, \u201cWe will all go\u201d (as NJPS mistranslates v. 9; see OJPS)? Why must he specify \u201cyoung and old\u201d and so forth?
\nExodus 10:7
\nRASHI
\nAre you not yet aware? The translations are correct here.
\nRASHBAM
\nEgypt is lost. With OJPS, \u201cdestroyed\u201d\u2014by the pestilence, the hail, and the other plagues.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThis. Either this thing (your refusal to let the people go) or this person (Moses). Are you not yet aware that Egypt is lost? The correct translation is, \u201cDo you first want to be certain that Egypt is lost\u201d before you let the people go?
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nPharaoh\u2019s courtiers said to him. They had not wanted to argue with him in front of his opponent (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 10:8\u20139
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWho are the ones to go? Pharaoh wanted only the leaders, elders, and officers to go, the ones \u201cdesignated by name\u201d (Num. 1:17). Moses answered that even the boys and girls must go, for we must observe the Lord\u2019s festival, on which all of us are commanded to celebrate before Him. Pharaoh got angry at Moses\u2019 insistence on bringing along the boys and girls, and said that there was no way he was going to let the children go, for they would not be sacrificing. He would just let the important men go, on account of the festival Moses had mentioned, but the women and children must remain.
\nExodus 10:8
\nRASHI
\nWere brought back. By a messenger who was sent after them to bring them back to Pharaoh.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses and Aaron were brought back. The particle et that introduces \u201cMoses and Aaron\u201d in the Hebrew text adds emphasis but no meaning. Don\u2019t think that it always introduces the direct object of the verb, just because it usually does; there are some biblical examples (e.g., 1 Sam. 17:34) that refute the notion. Ibn Hayyuj thinks the verb is singular because of the use of this particle, but I believe it is singular simply because Moses is the main character, as I have explained in my comment to v. 6. The same phenomenon is found in Num. 12:1, \u201cMiriam and Aaron spoke against Moses,\u201d where the verb is in the feminine singular because Miriam is the main character.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWho are the ones to go? Pharaoh opened the negotiations by acting as if only some of the men would go. He assumed that Moses\u2019 demand for even children and animals to go was also a negotiating ploy, and that in the end they would compromise on all of the men, but only them, going (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 10:9
\nIBN EZRA
\nWe must observe the Lord\u2019s festival. We have a sacrifice we are all commanded to perform, so we must all go.
\nExodus 10:10
\nRASHI
\nThe same as I mean to let your children go with you! Even though I will let your sheep and cattle go, as you requested. Clearly, you are bent on mischief. Onkelos is correct here. Based on the literal meaning of these words (\u201csee ye that evil is before your face,\u201d OJPS), I have heard the following midrash: There is a star named \u201cEvil.\u201d Said Pharaoh to them, \u201cI see by astrological means that that star is rising to meet you in the wilderness; and it is a sign of blood and slaughter.\u201d When Israel sinned with the Golden Calf and the Holy One sought to slaughter them, Moses said in his prayer, \u201cLet not the Egyptians say, \u2018For Evil did He bring them forth\u2019 (32:12). Isn\u2019t that just what Pharaoh told them? \u2018Evil is before your face\u2019!\u201d Immediately, \u201cthe Lord repented of the Evil\u201d (32:14). Instead, he made the blood from Joshua\u2019s circumcision of the Israelites (Josh. 5:3\u20139) serve as the astrologically predicted blood; hence His saying, \u201cToday I have rolled away from you the disgrace of Egypt\u201d (Josh. 5:9). The \u201cdisgrace\u201d was the Egyptians\u2019 taunting them, \u201cWe see a bloody experience waiting for you in the desert.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nYou are bent on mischief. Literally, \u201cevil is opposite your faces\u201d\u2014in your hearts you are planning mischief. Here is what proves it: \u201cAh, those who are so wise\u2014in their own opinion; so clever\u2014opposite their own faces!\u201d (Isa. 5:21).
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord be with you. May the Lord who you claim is with you be with you just as you say he is! You are bent on mischief. OJPS gives the literal meaning, \u201cevil is before your face.\u201d NJPS misinterprets the idiom. It means: Evil is so close to you that it is in front of your face\u2014the evil that I ought to do to you. (He thought they were about to flee.) Notice that our master Moses did not tell Pharaoh that they would return, which would have been a lie. He merely said they were going to go three days\u2019 distance into the wilderness. It was the Egyptians who thought they were going to return, which is why they lent them gold and silver (12:35). There was another reason that Moses did not mention returning. If Pharaoh had given them permission to leave and not return, then he would not have pursued them. God commanded things to happen as they did so that Pharaoh would pursue them and drown. This is made clear by 14:2, \u201cTell the Israelites to turn back and encamp before Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea.\u201d One may not question God\u2019s actions, for everything He does is done with wisdom, even if its wisdom is concealed from human sages.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYou are bent on mischief. Literally, with OJPS, \u201cevil is before your face.\u201d Rashi says Onkelos offers the correct understanding here. It would have been better for Rashi to spell out what he meant, for there are several versions of Onkelos\u2019s translation to this verse. Onkelos makes clear that the \u201cmischief\u201d is the evil that Pharaoh thinks the Israelites intend to do. But one version says this evil \u201csits\u201d opposite their faces, meaning that he realizes they intend to flee, while another says that the evil will \u201creturn\u201d opposite their faces, meaning that he is warning that the evil they are about to do him will rebound against them. This latter reading matches the midrash from Exodus Rabbah, where Pharaoh says: \u201cIt is young men and elders who sacrifice. But children and little ones? Anyone who says he is taking children with him to offer sacrifice clearly means to flee. So what you intend to do will rebound against you by making sure not one of you will leave\u2014measure for measure.\u201d I have also found still another variant of the Aramaic translation that says that the evil will not return from opposite their face\u2014i.e., their faces demonstrate their guilt. The straightforward sense of the text, however, is \u201cthe evil that I intend to do to you is close in front of you\u201d\u2014for I will requite you with evil now that I realize you want to flee.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Lord be with you the same as I mean to let your children go with you! That is\u2014not at all (Gersonides). Not even to mention your livestock (Sforno).
\nExodus 10:11\u201314
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 When Pharaoh says, \u201cYou menfolk go and worship the Lord\u201d (v. 11), something that Moses and Aaron never requested, why does he add, \u201csince that is what you want\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why are we told specifically that the locusts were brought by an east wind (v. 13) and dispersed by a west wind (v. 19)?
\n\u2666 How can the text say, \u201cNever before had there been so many, nor will there ever be so many again\u201d (v. 14), when we are told of the later locust plague in Joel, \u201cNothing like it has ever happened\u201d (Joel 2:2)?
\nExodus 10:11
\nRASHI
\nNo! You shall not bring your children with you, as you said, but you menfolk go and worship the Lord, since that is what you want. More literally, \u201cthat is what you are seeking\u201d\u2014that is what you have sought up until now: \u201cLet us go and sacrifice to our God!\u201d (5:8). Children do not offer sacrifices.
\nRASHBAM
\nSince that is what you want. \u201cSince what you have been asking me for is to worship the Lord, why would children and women be involved?\u201d That is why Pharaoh tells them, \u201cThe Lord be with you\u201d in v. 10.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNo! Only you menfolk go now and worship the Lord, if that, worship of the Lord, is what you want. But I think \u201cthat\u201d refers to the evil that Pharaoh threatened them with in v. 10: \u201cThe evil I am going to do to you is so close it is before your face, for that is what you are seeking. You are looking for trouble!\u201d Menfolk. The Hebrew word gever used here always refers only to males; not so adam, which is a generic term.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nYou menfolk go. And I will hold your children hostage to see that you return (Bekhor Shor). That is what you want. What you have been asking for up to now is to go and return. Others think \u201cthat\u201d refers to sacrificing, or to Pharaoh\u2019s belief that the Israelites had been negotiating with the ultimate aim of permitting the men to go. But these explanations do not fit the order of the verse as well as mine does (Bekhor Shor). They were expelled. Having been summoned, they could not leave without permission. Pharaoh expelled them because he was sure God would not repeat the plague of hail (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 10:12
\nIBN EZRA
\nHold out your arm over the land of Egypt for the locusts. Moses Gikatilla interprets the Hebrew literally: \u201cHold out your arm \u2026 with the locust,\u201d implying that there was a locust on Moses\u2019 rod. But this is not correct; the translations give the right meaning: \u201cHold out your arm so the locusts will come.\u201d If Gikatilla is correct, there is some astrological mystery involved.
\nExodus 10:13
\nRASHI
\nThe east wind had brought the locusts. For that is the direction opposite Egypt, which is southwest of Israel, as I explain in my commentary to Num. 34:3 and in my map there.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe east wind had brought the locusts. From where they were and then left them throughout the kingdom of Egypt. In Biblical Hebrew, the directions are oriented to an observer facing the sunrise. East is (etymologically) the direction that is before you and west the direction that is behind you (see Job 23:8). So the \u201ceast\u201d wind here is literally the \u201cfront\u201d wind.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAll that day and all night. Like English \u201cday,\u201d the Hebrew word yom sometimes refers to the period when the sun shines and sometimes to the combination of day and night (Kimhi).
\nExodus 10:14
\nRASHI
\nNor will there ever be so many again. Yet we learn that the locust plague of Joel\u2019s time, of which it was said, \u201cNothing like it has ever happened\u201d (Joel 2:2), was worse than this one. For Joel\u2019s consisted of several kinds of insects, \u201cthe cutter \u2026 the locust \u2026 the grub \u2026 the hopper\u201d (Joel 1:4), and Moses\u2019 only of the one kind. But there never had been and would never again be \u201cso many\u201d of this one kind.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNor will there ever be so many again. This was written prophetically.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nNor will there ever be so many again. The text informs us of this prophetically. I find Rashi\u2019s comment here difficult. For we know from Ps. 78:46, \u201cHe gave their crops over to grubs,\u201d and Ps. 105:34, \u201cgrasshoppers without number,\u201d that more than one kind of insect was involved here too. Rashi might reply that what the text really says is \u201cthere were no such locusts\u201d (OJPS); that although there were more total locusts in this plague than in Joel\u2019s, there were more of the other kinds in Joel\u2019s plague than in Moses\u2019. But all that is nonsense. What the text is saying is that there never had been so many, or ever would be again, in all the land of Egypt. It may be that the constant moisture provided by the Nile is what prevents the locusts from being a major problem there, for locusts generally come during years of drought: \u201cthe watercourses are dried up\u201d (Joel 1:20). Rabbenu Hananel says in his Torah commentary: \u201cFrom the time Moses prayed for the removal of the locusts until today, not a single locust has caused loss anywhere in Egypt, and if locusts fall upon the land of Israel and happen to get to Egypt, they do not eat any of the produce of that land, up to the present time. They say that this is already known to all. Look at the frogs, of whom it says that they shall remain \u2018only in the Nile\u2019 (8:5), as indeed they do. But of the locusts it says, \u2018not a single locust remained in all the territory of Egypt\u2019 (v. 19). \u2018Sing praises to Him; speak of all His wondrous acts\u2019 (Ps. 105:2).\u201d In my opinion, the straightforward sense is that, since plagues of locusts come several times per generation, and since this particular one came on the wind as they ordinarily do, the text had to emphasize that this one was much greater than the natural plagues of locusts that occur. Its unusual size would make clear that this was a divinely sent plague. The one in Joel\u2019s time, too, was divinely sent.
\nExodus 10:15\u201319
\nExodus 10:15
\nRASHI
\nNothing green was left. No \u201cverdure,\u201d as we call it in French.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe land was darkened. Of course the land is always dark; it is the sun that shines. What the text means is that the locusts came between the sun and the land.
\nExodus 10:16
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh hurriedly summoned Moses and Aaron. Literally \u201ccalled\u201d them (compare OJPS)\u2014by means of messengers. I stand guilty \u2026 before you. For having expelled you from my presence (v. 11).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHurriedly. Before the locusts could eat the roots of the wheat, the emmer, and the other grasses (Sforno). I stand guilty before the Lord your God and before you. Before God for refusing to let His people go and before you two by having expelled you from my presence (Gersonides).
\nExodus 10:17
\nIBN EZRA
\nForgive my offense. Since the verb \u201cforgive\u201d is in the singular, and \u201cplead\u201d is in the plural, some assume that \u201cforgive\u201d is addressed to God and \u201cplead\u201d to His prophets, Moses and Aaron. According to v. 18, it is Moses alone who pleads; so the plural may simply be a polite gesture to Aaron. \u201cForgive\u201d is literally to \u201ccarry\u201d or to \u201cbear\u201d; I will explain this word in my comment to 34:7. Just this once. For I will never again sin by rebelling against God\u2019s command.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nForgive my offense. Pharaoh actually says, \u201cForgive, I pray thee\u201d (OJPS), out of respect for Moses, who was \u201cin the role of God to Pharaoh\u201d (7:1) and \u201cmuch esteemed in the land of Egypt\u201d (11:3). Plead with the Lord your God. Pharaoh says this in the plural, to both Moses and Aaron, out of politeness, though he knows that it is Moses who will plead, from what Moses said to him in 8:5, 8:25, and 9:29. Moses did not include Aaron in these remarks to Pharaoh, saying \u201cI\u201d and not \u201cwe,\u201d to make sure that no lie would come out of his mouth.
\nExodus 10:18
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe left Pharaoh\u2019s presence and pleaded with the Lord. Moses was so angry about having been expelled that he did not demand that Pharaoh let the people go, but just left the city, as was his custom, to pray.
\nExodus 10:19
\nRASHI
\nThe Sea of Reeds. I say that the Sea of Reeds extends both southwest and southeast of the land of Israel. Thus a west wind could blow the locusts into the Sea of Reeds, opposite Egypt. We see from \u201cI will set your borders from the Sea of Reeds to the Sea of Philistia\u201d (23:31) that the Sea of Reeds extends east of the Sea of Philistia, that is, the Mediterranean. For Zeph. 2:5 confirms that the Philistines inhabited the Mediterranean coast. Not a single locust remained. Not even the ones they had salted away for food.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord caused a shift to a very strong west wind. Since an east wind had brought them from the sea, a west wind took them back to the sea.
\nIBN EZRA
\nA shift to a very strong west wind. God shifted the east wind to a west wind, blowing the locusts to the Sea of Reeds, which is east of Egypt, not as Saadia thinks. A \u201cwest\u201d wind in Biblical Hebrew is literally a \u201csea\u201d wind, referring to the Mediterranean Sea, which extends from Spain past Egypt to the western shore of the land of Israel. The Mediterranean is called the \u201cGreat Sea\u201d in the Bible because it is 300 leagues long, while none of the seas in the land of Israel\u2014the Sea of Reeds, the Sea of Galilee, the Dead Sea\u2014are even 30 leagues long. The \u201cGreat Sea\u201d does not mean the Atlantic, for Israel\u2019s inheritance did not reach that far.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nNot a single locust remained. Everything that was created just for the sake of the plague, like the frogs and lice, died when the plague was over. But everything that already existed and simply came from somewhere else, like the locusts and the swarms, simply returned to where it had come from (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 10:20\u201323
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 What is the meaning of \u201ca darkness that can be touched\u201d (v. 21)?
\n\u2666 Why did the Egyptians not simply light lamps so they could see in the darkness?
\nExodus 10:20
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord stiffened Pharaoh\u2019s heart. As our Sages said in the Talmud, \u201cOne who seeks to defile himself is given the opportunity.\u201d
\nExodus 10:21
\nRASHI
\nA darkness that can be touched. A darkness more dark than the dark of night. The dark of night grew darker still. The word translated as \u201ctouched,\u201d ve-yamesh, is really a form of the verb \u05d0\u05de\u05e9, \u201cto grow dark.\u201d The disappearance of the aleph is not uncommon; it is barely pronounced anyway. Onkelos takes the word to be from \u05d0\u05de\u05e9, \u201cto move away,\u201d as in \u201cThe pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart [lo yamish] from before the people\u201d (13:22). Thus he translates, \u201cdarkness upon the land of Egypt after the darkness of night has departed,\u201d a darkness that would begin at dawn. But the Hebrew text does not say \u201cafter,\u201d it says \u201cand.\u201d The midrash takes this verb to be from \u05de\u05e9\u05e9, \u201cto grope,\u201d as in Deut. 28:29, \u201cYou shall grope [memashesh] at noon as a blind man gropes in the dark,\u201d indicating that the darkness was so thick it was doubled and redoubled, until it became a darkness of substance, mamash.
\nRASHBAM
\nA darkness that can be touched. Rather, \u201cthe darkness will grow intensely dark,\u201d from the verb \u05d0\u05de\u05e9, \u201cto grow dark.\u201d That is, the darkness of night would grow deeper and gloomier for a long time. It would not brighten again for three days.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHold out your arm. Obviously the rod was in his hand even though this is not written. Darkness. Moses did not warn Pharaoh in advance, because he was angry at having been expelled. Even after summoning Moses and asking him to get rid of the locusts, Pharaoh had not let the Israelites go. A darkness that can be touched. The verb ve-yamesh comes from \u05de\u05d5\u05e9 (\u201cto touch\u201d), as in \u201cThey have hands, but cannot touch [yemishun]\u201d (Ps. 115:7). The sense is that there would be a fog so thick that Egypt could feel it. Some take it to be from \u05de\u05e9\u05e9 (\u201cto grope\u201d), as in Deut. 28:29, \u201cYou shall grope at noon as a blind man gropes [yemashesh] in the dark.\u201d It might also be from \u05de\u05d5\u05e9 in the sense of \u201cto move away,\u201d as in \u201cThe pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night did not depart [yamish] from before the people\u201d (13:22). In this case, the sense of the whole verse would be, \u201cthat there may be darkness upon the land of Egypt, and that the dark gloom of night depart (from the place of Israel),\u201d as in 14:20, where the darkness \u201cgave light by night.\u201d Some think that it is related to the word emesh (\u201clast night\u201d), but this interpretation makes no sense.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHold out your arm toward the sky that there may be darkness. The west wind that got rid of the locusts had brought thick, dark clouds; Moses signaled that they should stay over Egypt and not cover Goshen (Abarbanel). A darkness that can be touched. As Genesis Rabbah tells us, this was an unnaturally thick cloud, explaining why they could not get up or see one another. They had to stop up their mouths and nostrils to make sure they did not breathe this gas, for to do so would be fatal. So the suffering wreaked on them by this plague was extreme (Gersonides). The natural darkness of night is simply air that has no light; this would be air so thick that light could not get in (Sforno).
\nExodus 10:22
\nRASHI
\nThree days. A threesome of days.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThree days. Having told us that the days were dark, the text did not need to tell us that the nights were dark also. The Egyptians only knew that it was three days because the Israelites, who had light, told them. In the Atlantic Ocean there sometimes comes darkness so thick that one cannot tell the difference between day and night, and this may last for up to five days. I have been there many times.
\nExodus 10:23
\nRASHI
\nAnd for three days no one could get up. This is a second period of three days, after the three days during which \u201cpeople could not see each other.\u201d This was a redoubled darkness, so thick that one who was sitting could not stand and one who was standing could not sit. And why did God bring darkness upon them? Because in that generation, there were sinners among the Israelites who did not want to leave. It was during those three days of thick darkness that they died, so that the Egyptians might not see them and think, They are being afflicted just as we are. Moreover, the Israelites took the opportunity to look over all of the Egyptians\u2019 possessions. When they were ready to leave Egypt and asked to borrow a particular thing from an Egyptian, the Egyptian would say, \u201cI don\u2019t have one.\u201d The Israelite would say, \u201cI saw one in your house, in such-and-such a place.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nFrom where he was. From his house, according to the straightforward sense of the verse; for they could not see where they were going. Light in their dwellings. Even if they dwelled in an Egyptian\u2019s house.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPeople could not see one another. In the light of day. But perhaps they could see by candlelight. No one could get up. That is, no one could leave his house and go to work. Similarly, \u201cLet everyone sit where he is\u201d of 16:29 really means \u201cLet everyone remain where he is.\u201d Where could they go without light?
\nNAHMANIDES
\nPeople could not see one another, and for three days no one could get up from where he was. This darkness was not merely the absence of sunlight, so that the sun set and it was as dark as night, but it was a thick darkness\u2014that is, a dense fog that descended from the sky: \u201cHold out your arm toward the sky that there may be darkness upon the land\u201d (v. 21). This darkness extinguished every light, just as in deep mines and other places of intense darkness no light can exist. Similarly, those who cross the Mountains of Darkness find that they cannot keep a light or any kind of fire burning. If this were not so in our verse, then they could simply have used lamps. \u201cHe sent darkness: it was very dark\u201d (Ps. 105:28). It was not merely that daylight was absent, but darkness was sent. It may be that such a dense fog could actually be physically felt, as our Sages said, like the Atlantic fogs mentioned by Ibn Ezra.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Israelites enjoyed light in their dwellings. In the land of Goshen; but the rest of Egypt was dark for everyone, even Israelites (Bekhor Shor). The rabbinic explanation is prompted by the fact that it says \u201cin their dwellings,\u201d not \u201cin the region of Goshen\u201d as in 9:26 (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 10:24\u201328
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does Moses demand that Pharaoh \u201calso\u201d provide offerings for the Lord (v. 25; see OJPS)\u2014which in the end he does not even do\u2014before announcing (v. 26) that the Israelites would take their own livestock as well?
\n\u2666 How did Pharaoh dare to say, \u201cTake care not to see me again, for the moment you look upon my face you shall die\u201d (v. 28)?
\nExodus 10:24
\nIBN EZRA
\nThen. After three days, when they could see again. Only your flocks and your herds shall be left behind. He wanted to see what Moses was thinking, whether it was his intention to flee. Even your children may go. In accordance with what Moses had said in v. 9.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo, worship the Lord. Pharaoh did not ask for the darkness to be removed, assuming that it was dark for the Israelites too, and prayer would not help (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 10:25
\nRASHI
\nYou yourself must provide. It is not sufficient that \u201cour own livestock \u2026 shall go along\u201d (v. 26), but you must give us some of your livestock.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou yourself must provide us with sacrifices. Some think he actually did this, and that this was the reason he said, \u201cMay you bring a blessing upon me also!\u201d (12:32). But I think Moses meant: You must even give us animals to sacrifice on your behalf, to persuade God to remove all these plagues from you. So how can we leave our own animals behind? (Remember that sacrifice is preventive: \u201clest He strike us with pestilence\u201d [5:3].)
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYou yourself must provide us with sacrifices and burnt offerings. Moses did not say this because he expected Pharaoh actually to do it, which in fact he did not. It was an expression emphasizing that God would strike at Pharaoh and his people so hard that he would give sacrifices and burnt offerings and everything he had to save his life. In fact, it is true; when he says, \u201cBless me, too\u201d (12:32), he would have willingly given all his livestock to atone for his sin. But Moses had no intention of offering \u201cthe sacrifice of the wicked man\u201d (Prov. 21:27), for \u201cthe Lord chose to crush him\u201d (Isa. 53:10), not to forgive him but to punish him and hurl him and all his army into the sea (12:27). Our Sages explained \u201cTake also your flocks and your herds, as you said\u201d (12:32) as a reference to this verse. Perhaps they meant that Pharaoh alluded to this verse in saying that Moses and Aaron could take everything they had mentioned: but they certainly did not take anything of his. Or perhaps what the Sages meant was that they did take them to sacrifice, but on their own behalf, not on his. But even this cannot be correct.
\nExodus 10:26
\nRASHI
\nWe shall not know with what we are to worship the Lord. We do not know how much He will ask of us\u2014perhaps more than we ourselves have.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNot a hoof. Of any of our animals, since we do not know what kind of animal we must sacrifice. With what we are to worship. With many animals, or with few. Until we arrive there. \u201cThere\u201d means at Mount Sinai, as I have explained in my comment to 3:12; this was the place that Moses told Pharaoh was \u201ca distance of three days\u201d (8:23).
\nExodus 10:27
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord stiffened Pharaoh\u2019s heart. As he did to King Sihon of Heshbon (Deut. 2:30).
\nExodus 10:28
\nIBN EZRA
\nPharaoh said to him. To Moses, not to the Lord. V. 27 is a parenthetical comment. You shall die. I will have you killed for violating the royal edict.
\nExodus 10:29\u201311:3
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 When God announces that He will bring \u201cone more plague\u201d (v. 1) upon Pharaoh and Egypt, why does He not tell Moses what it is?
\n\u2666 Why was Pharaoh not given any warning of this plague, the greatest\u2014and most essential\u2014of them all?
\nExodus 10:29
\nRASHI
\nYou have spoken rightly. You have spoken well, and in a timely fashion. It is true, I shall not see your face again!
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou have spoken rightly. It might also be translated: \u201cMay it be as you have spoken.\u201d For I shall not come to you or ever see your face. Or instead of \u201cever\u201d it might mean \u201cagain,\u201d as NJPS translates, following the explanation of this word in my comment to Gen. 5:21.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI shall not see your face again! Once I leave. For during the killing of the first-born he did not see him. When Pharaoh \u201csummoned\u201d Moses and Aaron (12:31), he went to the door of their house and cried out in the darkness, \u201cUp, depart from among my people.\u201d Or perhaps he sent messengers to them, the Egyptians who \u201curged the people on, impatient to have them leave the country\u201d in 12:33. Or perhaps Moses simply meant, I shall not see your face again in your palace\u2014I will not come to you again. As Exodus Rabbah puts it, \u201c \u2018You have spoken rightly\u2019 when you said, \u2018Take care not to see me again.\u2019 I will not come to you\u2014you will come to m<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n