Exodus 16:1
\nRASHI
\nThe fifteenth day. The day of this encampment is specifically given because on this exact day the cakes that they brought from Egypt gave out and they needed the manna. This teaches us that they ate the leftovers from the dough that they brought from Egypt for 61 meals. Manna began to fall on the 16th of Iyar, a Sunday, as we learn from B. Shab. 87b.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe fifteenth day of the second month. This is when they ran out of the \u201cunleavened cakes\u201d that they brought with them from Egypt.
\nIBN EZRA
\nFrom Elim \u2026 to the wilderness of Sin. The text here leaves out an intermediate encampment by the Sea of Reeds (Num. 33:10\u201311) where nothing in particular happened. The fifteenth day of the second month. According to Saadia, the point of recording this date is to inform us that the Israelites left Egypt on a Thursday. Now if the 15th of Nisan was a Thursday, so was the 1st, making the 1st of Iyar a Saturday, meaning that the action of our verse took place on the Sabbath. Manna begins to fall on the next day, Sunday. Thus \u201cthe sixth day\u201d (v. 5) is really the sixth day of the week, Friday. Let us accept what Saadia says here on the basis of tradition, but not on the basis of exegesis. For who told him that the manna began to fall on the day after they came to the wilderness of Sin? They may have stayed there four or five days before the manna began to fall on a Sunday. We should begin to count from the day the manna began to fall, for all the nations rely on Israel for this number.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nSetting out from Elim \u2026 to the wilderness of Sin. The text here does not list their travels comprehensively; see Numbers 33 for that. The wilderness of Sin is quite large, stretching from Elim to Sinai. After leaving Elim, they stopped at the Red Sea, in that wilderness. Leaving the shore of the sea, they entered the wilderness, where they also stopped at Dophkah and Alush before reaching Rephidim. According to our Sages, the manna episode took place at Alush, for by that time they had camped several different places without managing to get out of the wilderness, and they began to be afraid and \u201cgrumbled against Moses\u201d (v. 2). Between Elim and Sinai. This is to distinguish between the wilderness of Sin and the wilderness of Zin (Num. 20:1), which they reached in the 40th year of their wandering. There Miriam died and, as here, the people had no water to drink.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSetting out from Elim. Despite the springs and the palm trees, they devotedly followed God into the wilderness (Sforno). The whole Israelite community. Not a man was missing (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 16:2\u20133
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Now that they have water, why are the people \u201cgrumbling\u201d against Moses and Aaron (v. 2)? If it is about the lack of food, why doesn\u2019t the text say so?
\n\u2666 Why are we told this happened \u201cin the wilderness,\u201d which we already know?
\n\u2666 Why are the Israelites not punished for what they say in v. 3, as they are in Numbers 11 for saying essentially the same thing?
\nExodus 16:2
\nRASHI
\nGrumbled. Because the bread had given out.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe whole Israelite community grumbled. At the waters of Marah they grumbled against Moses alone, for he was the one who \u201ccaused them to set out\u201d (15:22) to that spot. Moreover, only a few of them complained, and only about water. But now \u201cthe whole \u2026 community\u201d grumbled, and against Aaron as well (saying that both he and Moses had brought them out of Egypt, v. 3), and not only about water but also about food. For they had already eaten most of their livestock, for by now it was 30 days after their departure from Egypt. A group this size could not easily buy food except at a very high price.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nIn the wilderness. See the previous comment. They did not grumble as soon as they entered the wilderness, but only after having been there for some time. The whole Israelite community grumbled against Moses and Aaron. The text ought to have given the content of their complaint, as it did in 15:24 and 17:2, by saying, \u201cThere was no flesh to eat nor bread to satisfy the people\u2019s hunger.\u201d Rashi\u2019s comment (to v. 1), that the dough they brought from Egypt gave out on this day after 61 meals, is based on rabbinic tradition; this explains why their complaint was not spelled out. For the text did not wish to deal at length with this miracle of the 61 meals, which was done for them secretly. I have already explained the reason for this in my comments to Gen. 17:1 and Gen. 46:15. Ibn Ezra thinks the point of their complaint was that by this time they had eaten most of the livestock they had brought with them. In my opinion, the point is that they were now at some distance from Egypt and wondered what they would eat in the great desert that they were entering. They may have thought that within a few days they would reach one of the local cities, and now they had been traveling for a month without finding a town. It was the thought of dying in the wilderness that caused the grumbling. And see the next comment.
\nExodus 16:3
\nRASHBAM
\nBy the hand of the Lord. That is to say, \u201cin ripe old age\u201d (Job 5:26), not of starvation.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYou have brought us into this wilderness to starve this whole congregation to death. A group this large will inevitably starve in a desert this vast\u2014The Holy One heeded them and began, at this point, to \u201cspread a feast in the wilderness\u201d (Ps. 78:19) for them, \u201cuntil they came to a settled land\u201d (16:35).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nIf only we had died by the hand of the Lord. And not, as we are doing now, die before our time, of hunger (Hizkuni). If God wanted to kill us, it would have been better if He had done it when our bellies were full (Sforno). When we sat by the fleshpots, when we ate our fill of bread! Meat was expensive in Egypt; while they sat waiting for it to be cooked, they would eat their fill of bread, which was cheap (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:4\u20135
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Is everything that falls from the air really considered to be coming \u201cfrom heaven\u201d (v. 4, OJPS)?
\n\u2666 How can God\u2019s graciously raining down bread from the sky be considered a \u201ctest\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why did \u201cMoses and Aaron\u201d (v. 6) speak to the Israelites, when God spoke (v. 4) to Moses alone?
\nExodus 16:4
\nRASHI
\nEach day that day\u2019s portion. The portion that they need for that day. But they shall not gather the portion that they need for the next day. Whether they will follow My instructions. Whether they will keep the commandments concerning the manna: that they not leave any over until morning, and that they not go out on the Sabbath to gather it.
\nRASHBAM
\nThat day\u2019s portion. Even if they tried to gather a lot, at home they would find they had only \u201cthat day\u2019s portion.\u201d See v. 18. That I may thus test them. Better: \u201cthat I may thus train them.\u201d Knowing that their nourishment every day is dependent on Me, they will believe in Me and follow My instructions. \u201cHe subjected you to the hardship of hunger and then gave you manna to eat \u2026 in order to teach you that man does not live on bread alone, but that man may live on anything that the Lord decrees\u201d (Deut. 8:3).
\nIBN EZRA
\nRain down. The use is metaphoric. Bread. Food. You will find the word lehem used not only for bread, but also for meat (Lev. 3:11) and fruit (Jer. 11:19). The word milhamah, \u201cwar,\u201d is derived from it as well, since war is where the sword gets its \u201cfood.\u201d That I may thus test them. Since they will need Me every day. Some say this refers to those who left manna over until the next day, and to those who went out to gather on the Sabbath.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nRain down. Ibn Ezra notes that the use of the word is metaphoric, as in \u201cthe Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah sulfurous fire\u201d (Gen. 19:24). But in that incident it may have fallen along with actual rain. Onkelos takes the verb more generally, to mean \u201ccause to fall.\u201d Conceivably this word mamtir has some connection with matarah, \u201cthe target of his arrows\u201d (Lam. 3:12)\u2014though that is from a different root. For every action of throwing from above to below can be called by this word; despite the English translation, the word is used because the arrows \u201crain\u201d down on the target. Thus \u201cHe rained meat on them like dust\u201d (Ps. 78:27), which shows that this word can even be used of birds \u201craining\u201d down on them. Bread. For they made the manna into cakes (Num. 11:8); \u201cbread\u201d need not be made out of wheat or barley only. God will \u201crain down\u201d something whose purpose is to serve them as bread. Similarly \u201cEarth, out of which bread grows\u201d (Job 28:5); \u201cYou make the grass grow for the cattle, and herbage for man\u2019s labor that he may get bread out of the earth\u201d (Ps. 104:14). Bread does not literally come \u201cout of the earth\u201d; the Hebrew lehem may be used for the substance from which bread will be made. But some take it to mean \u201cfood\u201d in general, as in Lev. 3:11 and elsewhere, where the priest turns parts of a slaughtered animal into lehem, \u201can offering by fire to the Lord.\u201d See Prov. 23:1, where the verbal form of the same root is translated \u201cto dine.\u201d But the fact is that the verb means \u201cto eat bread.\u201d The symbolic \u201cfood\u201d of God is called \u201cbread,\u201d because that is the essential part of a human meal. Whether they will follow My instructions. Rashi\u2019s comment is incorrect. \u201cHe subjected you to the hardship of hunger and then gave you manna to eat, which neither you nor your fathers had ever known, in order to teach you that man does not live on bread alone, but that man may live on anything that the Lord decrees\u201d (Deut. 8:3). The test was to see whether they would go into a place where they had no food and no idea how to get any, where they were dependent on something they were totally unfamiliar with, of which they could get no more than a day\u2019s worth at a time. As Deut. 8:2 says, \u201cRemember the long way that the Lord your God has made you travel in the wilderness these past forty years, that He might test you by hardships to learn what was in your hearts: whether you would keep His commandments or not.\u201d God could have led them by way of the local cities; instead He led them \u201cthrough the great and terrible wilderness with its seraph serpents and scorpions\u201d (Deut. 8:15) so He could provide them with manna and they would believe in Him forever. I have already explained the concept of testing in my comments to Gen. 22:1. Maimonides (Guide 3:24) explains \u201cthat I may thus test them\u201d to mean \u201cin order that everyone should consider this and should see whether being devoted to His service is useful and sufficient or not sufficient\u201d; but to convey that meaning the text ought to have said, \u201cthat they may thus test.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI will rain down bread for you. This was My intention even before the people grumbled (Abarbanel). From the sky. Not to tell them that it was created in the air (which would be pointless), but to let them know that it would be ready to eat, not like grain, which must be prepared (Abarbanel). Each day that day\u2019s portion. To warn them not to try to turn the manna into a commodity (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:5
\nRASHI
\nIt shall prove to be double. For that day and for the next. After they bring it in, \u201cit shall prove to be double\u201d\u2014they will find that it measures twice as much as they are used to gathering on the other days of the week. I think \u201cthey gathered double the amount\u201d (v. 22) means that what they gathered was found to be double when they brought it back and measured it. \u201cHe gives you two day\u2019s food on the sixth day\u201d (v. 29) in order to put a blessing in your house, to fill the omer twice.
\nRASHBAM
\nWhen they apportion what they have brought in. Rather, when they \u201cprepare\u201d it (OJPS), baking what they would bake and boiling what they would boil. Double. Despite the fact that on every other day they found only one omer per head, on the sixth day they would find two omers each.
\nIBN EZRA
\nDouble. Two omers per person (v. 22).
\nExodus 16:6\u20138
\nExodus 16:6\u20137
\nRASHI
\nYou shall know it was the Lord who brought you out. For you told us, \u201cYou have brought us out\u201d (v. 3). Understand that it is not we who are bringing you out but the Lord who brought you out, and who will sweep in the quail for you. In the morning you shall behold the Presence of the Lord. This is not correct, for they beheld the Presence right away (v. 10). What he said to them was this: \u201cBy evening you shall know\u201d that God has the ability to satisfy your appetites and give you meat. He will not give it to you gladly, though, because you asked for it improperly, on a full stomach. But the bread, which you asked for because you needed it\u2014when it comes down, in the morning, \u201cyou shall behold the Presence\u201d of His gladness. For He will send the bread down to you affectionately in the morning, when there is time to prepare it and it can be packed neatly in between two layers of dew. Who are we? What makes you think we are important? That you should grumble against us. That you make everyone complain about us\u2014your sons, your wives, your daughters, the mixed multitude. The grammatical form of the word as it is supposed to be read forces me, unwillingly, to interpret this verb as a causative, like that in Num. 14:36, where the spies \u201ccame back and caused the whole community to mutter against him.\u201d Here, too, it must mean \u201cthat you should make others grumble against us.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nBy evening you shall know it was the Lord who brought you out from the land of Egypt. And not we, as you said in v. 3. In the morning you shall behold the Presence of the Lord. This does not refer to the appearance in v. 10, which took place that same day and not the next morning. Rashi\u2019s notion that the \u201cPresence of the Lord\u201d means that He gives them manna gladly is not correct. What does the \u201cPresence\u201d have to do with that, or with \u201cbecause He has heard your grumblings\u201d? The midrash cited by Rashi has nothing to do with the Presence of the Lord, but involves His giving them their sustenance twice a day rather than just once, in the morning. The midrash literally says that God will give them flesh \u201cwith a dark countenance\u201d\u2014that is, in the evening\u2014and bread \u201cwith a bright countenance\u201d\u2014in the morning. Ibn Ezra\u2019s connecting \u201cin the morning\u201d with v. 6 instead of v. 7 does not appear to be correct either. What I think is that the miracle of the manna was far greater than that of the quail, which were swept in from the sea by the wind in a natural way. But the manna was a brand-new creation for them at this moment in history, of the same nature as the creation of the world. This is why it is described as being among the 10 things created at twilight on the sixth day of creation. So our text means: By the sign He will perform for you this evening, you will know that it was He who brought you out of Egypt, for He will \u201cspread a feast in the wilderness\u201d (Ps. 78:19) for you. But through the great miracle He will perform for you in the morning you will see the Presence of the kingdom of the God \u201cwhose powerful deeds no god in heaven or on earth can equal\u201d (Deut. 3:24). For God\u2019s Presence is seen in the great and wonderful deeds that He performs. Onkelos shares this opinion, as can be seen by the fact that he translates word for word, rather than trying to avoid the notion of literally \u201cseeing\u201d God\u2019s Presence, as he would ordinarily do.
\nUnderstand that there is a matter of great significance involved in the manna, which our Sages allude to at B. Yoma 75b. There, R. Akiva interprets Ps. 78:25, \u201cMan did eat the bread of the mighty,\u201d to mean that manna was the same food eaten by the angels. His point is that the angels are sustained by the radiance of the Shekhinah. \u201cHow sweet is the light!\u201d (Eccles. 11:7)\u2014and manna partakes of the nature of the upper light, materialized by the will of its blessed Creator. So those who ate manna were nourished by the same thing that nourishes the angels. But R. Ishmael points out that there is a difference between the upper light and its materialized form. The \u201cheavenly grain\u201d of Ps. 78:24 is the materialized light of which I spoke. So it may have already existed in heaven, as the midrash about \u201cthe 10 things created at twilight\u201d suggests.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBy evening you shall know \u2026 in the morning you shall behold. The expression was rhetorically split between evening and morning. It really means: You shall know and behold by evening; you shall behold and know in the morning (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 16:6
\nRASHBAM
\nIt was the Lord who brought you out. Not we, as you said (in v. 3).
\nIBN EZRA
\nBy evening you shall know it was the Lord who brought you out from the land of Egypt. According to 14:31, they already \u201chad faith\u201d in the Lord. But apparently many of them did not actually know the truth, for they said in v. 3 that it was Moses and Aaron who had brought them out of Egypt, presumably meaning that they had done it on their own, without God\u2019s approval. Thus they told the Israelites they would see two signs (v. 8) that it was indeed God who had brought them out of Egypt.
\nExodus 16:7
\nRASHBAM
\nIn the morning you shall behold the Presence of the Lord. Who will rain down bread for you in the morning.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAnd in the morning. This belongs with v. 6; they beheld God\u2019s Presence immediately, not the next day. The Presence of the Lord. Which appeared like a consuming fire in the cloud. Its appearance would be the sign that God had heard their grumbling. Who are we? Literally, \u201cWe\u2014what?\u201d What have we done to make you grumble? And what can we do? We have not done anything but what we were commanded to do. That you should grumble against us. This is a causative verb; Moses and Aaron are asking the leaders of the people why they have made the people grumble against them.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWho are we? Ibn Ezra\u2019s comment is not correct; the question is one of humility, like \u201cWhat is man that You have been mindful of him?\u201d (Ps. 8:5). Who are we that you credit us with bringing you out of Egypt? We are nothing, our deeds are nullity\u2014\u201cYour grumbling is not against us, but against the Lord\u201d (v. 8), who brought you out of Egypt. The Mekilta interprets similarly.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Presence of the Lord. This was in reproof of their grumbling (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:8
\nRASHI
\nFlesh to eat. But not to the full. The Torah is teaching manners: One doesn\u2019t eat meat to the point of satiety. Why did He decide to bring the bread down for them in the morning and the meat in the evening? Because they were right to ask for bread, which it is impossible to live without. But they were wrong in asking for meat, for they had many animals, and anyway they could have lived without meat. So it was given to them at a troublesome hour, at the wrong time of day. The grumblings you cause others to utter against Him\u2014those who hear you complaining.
\nIBN EZRA
\nFlesh to eat in the evening and bread in the morning. These are the two signs he promised them. The Lord has heard the grumblings that you utter against Him. When the signs show that He has heard you, let it be clear to you that you have sinned, and that your grumblings are directed against God, not against us, as you thought.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nFlesh to eat in the evening. This was omitted from v. 4, where God told it to Moses, to avoid redundancy. This phenomenon occurs in both law and narrative, as I have explained to you many times. Sometimes the original utterance is omitted entirely, as in the case of \u201cThis is what the Lord has commanded\u201d (v. 32). But for those who take lehem to mean \u201cfood,\u201d \u201crain down bread\u201d of v. 4 really includes both the bread and the quail, while in this verse Moses specifies flesh in the evening and bread in the morning, as is customary.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nIn the evening \u2026 in the morning. Because of the long interjection, Moses repeats what he began to say in v. 6 (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 16:9\u201312
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why do Moses and Aaron consider God\u2019s feeding the Israelites (v. 8) to be proof that it was He who brought them out of Egypt (v. 6)?
\n\u2666 What do they mean by saying, \u201cWhat is our part?\u201d?
\n\u2666 God said He would rain down bread\u2014how could Moses promise them meat?
\n\u2666 Why did the Israelites have to \u201cadvance toward the Lord\u201d (v. 9)?
\n\u2666 Why does v. 12 not add \u201cwho brought you out from the land of Egypt,\u201d as Moses and Aaron had told them in v. 6?
\n\u2666 Having promised them meat, why did God not tell them how to slaughter it properly?
\n\u2666 Did they get meat on the Sabbath, or two days worth on Friday?
\n\u2666 Having been fed on this occasion, how could the Israelites offer the same complaint again in Numbers 11?
\nExodus 16:9
\nRASHI
\nAdvance. Toward the place where the cloud has come down.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAdvance toward the Lord. Toward the Tent of Meeting, that is, Moses\u2019 tent, called the Tent of Meeting because that is where the chieftains met with him.
\nExodus 16:10
\nIBN EZRA
\nToward the wilderness. Moses\u2019 tent was outside the camp.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThere, in a cloud, appeared the Presence of the Lord. As often happened, the Israelites could see that Moses was receiving prophecy; this was so that they would fully accept his prophecies as coming from God (Gersonides).
\nExodus 16:11
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord spoke to Moses. The people saw that Moses went to the Presence and He spoke with him.
\nExodus 16:12
\nRASHBAM
\nYou shall know that I the Lord am your God. Who brought you out of Egypt.
\nIBN EZRA
\nBy evening you shall eat flesh, and in the morning you shall have your fill of bread. This time, having seen the Presence, the people believed. \u201cBy evening\u201d is the same phrase translated \u201cat twilight\u201d in 12:6; see my comment there. This verse proves that \u201cand in the morning\u201d of v. 7 really belongs with v. 6.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nSpeak to them and say. Moses had already told them this in v. 8. Repeated now after \u201cI have heard the grumbling of the Israelites,\u201d it makes clear that the manna is not an act of God\u2019s freely given love, nor something they deserved (which it was originally intended to be), but a response to their sin of complaining, to make them know that I the Lord am your God. For so far you do not believe in the Lord your God, which is why you grumble at His prophets\u2014It may be that at first, in v. 8, He did not promise them that they would have manna and quail for their entire time in the wilderness, and that they thought they would only have them for a day or two, at this particular place, after which they would return to eating regular food; here in v. 12, they are promised bread and meat for the entire time. Our Sages were certainly of the opinion that they had quail for the whole time they had manna. It is entirely plausible, since they were complaining about both things, and it is hard to believe He would bring the quail for just a day or two and then stop. The text goes on at length about the manna simply because it was miraculous, while the quail came in a natural way. The incident of the quail in Numbers 11 merely shows that in our passage (v. 8) they were promised quail \u201cto eat\u201d\u2014not \u201cto the full,\u201d as they were promised with regard to bread. It may also be that the quail they did get were hoarded by the powerful or reserved for the pious, in which case the young men would still be hungry for it\u2014note that, unlike the manna, the quail is not said to have gone in equal amounts to everyone. According to Num. 11:4, it was \u201cthe riffraff\u201d that felt \u201ca gluttonous craving,\u201d in which some, but not all, of the Israelites joined. But the straightforward explanation is that they got quail occasionally, not regularly, like manna, which was their staple and the main point of their grumbling.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBy evening \u2026 in the morning. We learn that one is supposed to eat two meals a day (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 16:13\u201315
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How could a \u201cfall\u201d of dew \u201clift\u201d (v. 14)?
\nExodus 16:13
\nRASHI
\nThe quail. It is a kind of bird, extremely fatty. A fall of dew. OJPS \u201ca layer of dew\u201d is more literal\u2014the dew lay on top of the manna. In Num. 11:9 it really does say, \u201cWhen the dew fell on the camp.\u201d So we learn that the dew fell on the ground, the manna fell on top of it, and dew fell again on top of that, leaving the manna as if packaged between the two layers.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIn the evening. Of that very day. Quail appeared. Literally, \u201ccame up\u201d (OJPS) from the direction of the sea (Num. 11:31). A fall of dew. Or perhaps a \u201cflow\u201d of dew.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nQuail. It seems to me that this is the same incident reported in Numbers 11, reported here because it fits with the story of the manna (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 16:14
\nRASHI
\nWhen the fall of dew lifted. When the sun rose, the dew on top of the manna rose up toward it, as dew normally does. If you fill an eggshell with dew, plug it up so that the dew cannot get out, and leave it in the sun, it will rise up in the air on its own. Our Sages interpreted this phrase to mean that the dew rose up off the ground, and this revealed the layer of manna\u2014there, over the surface of the wilderness, lay a fine and flaky substance. Rather, \u201ca fine substance was revealed.\u201d But the word translated here as \u201cflaky\u201d is not found anywhere else in the Bible; based on a similar mishnaic word that means \u201ca container,\u201d we might interpret as follows: \u201cThere, over the surface of the wilderness, a fine substance lay packed.\u201d When the top layer of dew lifted, they could see the fine substance that had been packed between the two layers. Onkelos translates the word \u201cpeeling,\u201d deriving the sense from the similar word used when Jacob \u201cpeeled white stripes\u201d (Gen. 30:37) in poplar shoots. As fine as frost. Before \u201cas frost\u201d Onkelos adds, \u201cas inkstone.\u201d This is a kind of black color, mentioned in the discussion about covering up sacrificial blood in B. Hul. 88b. But this is an addition to the text; it does not translate any word in the Hebrew. He means: as fine as powdery inkstone, clumped together like frost.
\nRASHBAM
\nWhen the fall of dew lifted. Which would cover the manna with a glistening layer. Dew does in fact \u201clift.\u201d Flaky. A word that occurs nowhere else in the Bible. From the context, it would seem to mean \u201cscattered,\u201d like frost on the ground.
\nIBN EZRA
\nLifted. That is, ceased to fall. The dew fell first, in order to cleanse the ground, and when it stopped the manna fell: \u201cWhen the dew fell on the camp at night, the manna would fall upon it\u201d (Num. 11:9). Flaky. Some say it means \u201cround.\u201d The root of the word is not clear, but apparently it is a four-letter root. There is no other example of the word m\u2019huspas in the Bible; those who connect it with mahsof (Gen. 30:37) are not correct, as this would require a transformation that is grammatically impossible. Substance. May the bones of Hiwi the criminal and all who whore after him be ground to dust, who say that something like manna still falls in the desert. They say that, like manna, it falls with the dew in the Maghreb. They refer to what is called in Persian tar-angubin, a substance used in many medicines. But this assertion is shameless! For manna fell in the wilderness of Sin, which is a settled area. It also fell in the land of the two Amorite kings, and even after they crossed the Jordan. If manna was a natural phenomenon, why didn\u2019t it fall on the Sabbath, not to mention the other miraculous aspects? Besides, there are other reliable facts that refute what they say. This stuff that falls in the Sahara\u2014where I have seen it myself\u2014does not fall throughout the year, nor on every kind of plant; it does not melt in the sun; it lasts for days, months, even years without spoiling; it is not hard, and does not need to be ground in order to make cakes of it. So it is actually nothing like what they say.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA fine and flaky substance. Onkelos connects it with mahsof (Gen. 30:37), with a switch of sin to samekh, the two different letters that represent s in Hebrew, and with the second letter of the root repeated. As fine as frost. What Rashi says about \u201cinkstone\u201d is all wrong; the Hebrew word refers to a white substance that sticks to stones; it is ground to power and used to whitewash walls. It is extraordinarily white, and better than limestone for whitewashing walls. The Aramaic form of the word is used in Dan. 5:5, \u201cthe plaster of the wall.\u201d Thus the manna was white and strewn over the ground like crushed chalk. Rashi thinks Onkelos inserted a word that was not in the Hebrew; what he really did was translate the same word in two different ways, something he does in many places. But accurate texts of Onkelos have only a single translation here, \u201cpiled like frost on the ground,\u201d and this is the truth. The correct form of the Aramaic is a different word that has nothing to do with chalk.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe fall of dew. The midrash that the manna was between two layers of dew gave rise to the custom of putting the Sabbath loaves between two cloths (Abarbanel). A fine and flaky substance. Rather, \u201ca fine, round substance\u201d (Kimhi).
\nExodus 16:15
\nRASHI
\nWhat is it? Rather, \u201cit is a serving [man] of food,\u201d as in Dan. 1:5, \u201cthe king allotted [y\u2019man] daily rations to them.\u201d For they did not know what it was. So they could not call it by name.
\nRASHBAM
\nWhat is it? Dunash ben Labrat understands the phrase this way also; the end of the verse, \u201cthey did not know what it was,\u201d confirms this interpretation. I would add that man, translated \u201cwhat\u201d in the phrase \u201cWhat is it?\u201d actually means \u201cwho\u201d in Aramaic, not \u201cwhat.\u201d But this is Egyptian, in which language man is often used to mean \u201cwhat.\u201d So Moses wrote it in the language they actually spoke it in, to let us know why \u201cthe house of Israel named it manna\u201d (v. 31). You will find other non-Hebrew words simply transliterated in the Bible; e.g., Aramaic in Gen. 31:47 and Persian in Esther 3:7. As in those cases, it was necessary to include the foreign word here to explain the name.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhat is it? The phrase is man hu, and man here is the same as man in Ps. 61:8, where it means \u201cappoint.\u201d The Israelites are saying, \u201cIt is appointed,\u201d just like the officer who told Daniel that the king had \u201callotted [minnah] food and drink to you\u201d (Dan. 1:10). Whoever told Rashi that it means \u201cwhat is it?\u201d in Arabic was mistaken; in that language it can only mean \u201cwho,\u201d not \u201cwhat.\u201d Moses said to them. As Moses Gikatilla pointed out, Moses must have already said this to them. The text inserts it now because v. 16 fits into the story at this point.
\nExodus 16:16\u201320
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Aren\u2019t \u201cas much as each of you requires\u201d and \u201can omer to a person\u201d (v. 16) contradictory?
\n\u2666 Why couldn\u2019t they gather as much as they wanted?
\n\u2666 Why did the leftovers have to spoil?
\n\u2666 Having done what Moses asked, why did the Israelites have to \u201cmeasure it by the omer\u201d (v. 17)?
\nExodus 16:16
\nRASHI
\nOmer. This is a unit of measurement.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGather as much of it as each of you requires to eat. Because any more would spoil. An omer to a person. More literally, \u201cAn omer a head\u201d (OJPS). Logically, this applies only to adults; for children they would gather as much as the child required to eat.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAs much of it as each of you requires to eat, an omer to a person. If one member of the household ate a little more than an omer, another would eat a little less (Abarbanel). Each would gather exactly an omer, but this would turn out to be enough to satisfy those who ate a lot and not too much for those who ate little (Sforno). For those in his tent. This was a polite way of referring to his wife, who, out of modesty, would not leave the tent to gather (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:17
\nRASHBAM
\nGathering. Without estimation or measure.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSome gathering much, some little. The straightforward sense is that those who had larger families gathered more and those who had smaller families gathered less. But the ancients understand it to be miraculous.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSome gathering much, some little. Some were gathering for large households, some for small (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:18
\nRASHI
\nWhen they measured it by the omer. When they got home and measured what they had gathered, they found that those who gathered much had not gathered more than one omer per person, and those who gathered little found no less than an omer per person. This was a great miracle.
\nRASHBAM
\nWhen they measured it. At home.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhen they measured it by the omer. Everyone found that they had estimated correctly.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nNo excess \u2026 no deficiency. The one with excess threw it away; the other gathered more (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 16:19
\nIBN EZRA
\nLet no one leave any of it over until morning. The point was that no one should keep any of it to eat the next day, but that they should trust in God that it would fall again. It is not that there was a commandment to eat it all; if there was any left over, they were supposed to throw it away.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nLet no one leave any of it over until morning. Doing so would mean they were not eating enough, and would demonstrate a lack of faith (Gersonides).
\nExodus 16:20
\nRASHI
\nSome of them. Dathan and Abiram. Stank. OJPS \u201crotted\u201d is closer to the meaning. The words are reversed; it first rotted and subsequently became infested with maggots, as we learn from what did not happen on the Sabbath, \u201cit did not turn foul, and there were no maggots in it\u201d (v. 24). This is the process by which things become infested.
\nIBN EZRA
\nIt became infested with maggots and stank. Rather, \u201cit became infested with maggots, for it had spoiled.\u201d They paid no attention. \u201cSome of them\u201d paid no attention.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nIt became infested with maggots and stunk. Rashi\u2019s comment would be correct if manna spoiled in a natural way. But given that it happened miraculously, it is quite possible that it became infested first. There is no need for us to reverse the text. V. 24 actually proves this. In the natural order of things, if \u201cit did not turn foul,\u201d there would obviously be no maggots in it; in v. 24, not only did it not turn foul, but even the first stage (according to our verse), the maggots, did not appear. Even in nature, only hot and moist things spoil. Dry things, such as wood or certain fruits, may become infested with worms but not turn foul. But the text tells us that even the spoiling of the manna was miraculous. Exodus Rabbah says, \u201cThe Holy One wished to put those who sinned (by leaving the manna over until morning) on public display. Had it turned foul by evening, they would have smelled it and thrown it out. Instead, it produced rows and rows of worms all night. Immediately Moses was angry with them.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSome of them left of it until morning, and it became infested. To remind them that the fate of all men, despite the superfluities they pursue, is to rot and become food for worms (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:21\u201323
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How could the Israelites live off the manna if it melted when the sun grew hot (v. 21)?
\n\u2666 It was no trouble for the Israelites to gather the manna, and it did not need to be cooked\u2014why couldn\u2019t it fall on the Sabbath, too?
\nExodus 16:21
\nRASHI
\nWhen the sun grew hot, it would melt. Whatever was left on the ground would melt, run into streams, and be drunk by the deer and the gazelles. People of other nations who hunted them would taste the flavor of manna and know how praiseworthy Israel was. Instead of \u201cmelt,\u201d Onkelos translates \u201cdissolve.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nEvery morning. Before sunrise, in my opinion. When the sun grew hot. That is, when the day grew hot. The sun does not get any hotter.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThey gathered it every morning. Because by later in the day it all melted (Bekhor Shor). When the sun grew hot, it would melt. To make them get up early in the morning and gather the manna before the wind covered it with dust, and to teach them the value of working diligently (Gersonides).
\nExodus 16:22
\nRASHI
\nThey gathered double the amount of food. When they measured what they had gathered, back in their tents, they found double the amount\u2014two omers for each. Instead of mishneh, \u201cdouble,\u201d the midrash reads meshuneh, \u201cchanged.\u201d That day, it was changed for the better, both in smell and in taste. Told Moses. They asked him why this day was different than other days. From this we learn that Moses did not tell them what God had told him in v. 5 until they asked him about it. Then he said, \u201c \u2018This is what the Lord has spoken\u2019 (v. 23), which I ought to have told you.\u201d That is why the text punishes him by having God say to him, \u201cHow long will you men refuse to obey My commandments?\u201d (v. 28), including Moses among the refusers.
\nRASHBAM
\nTold Moses. They told him they had found double the amount, and asked him whether they should leave some over for the next day. Moses had not yet told them what the Holy One told him on the very first day (in v. 5).
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey gathered double the amount. More manna than usual fell, and they gathered twice as much as they usually did. For Moses had told them to do this, though they did not know why. Notice that the text does not say they found double the amount, merely that they gathered double the amount. The chieftains \u2026 told Moses. They told him that the Israelites had done what he told them to do, and that the Israelites wanted to know what to do now. How were they going to be able to eat so much?
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe chieftains \u2026 told Moses. Being afraid to leave it over, since he had already scolded them about this (Hizkuni). If Ibn Ezra is correct, why didn\u2019t they ask him what to do when he first told them? In fact, God wanted to show them in this way that the seventh day was the Sabbath before Moses told them about it (Gersonides).
\nExodus 16:23\u201325
\nNAHMANIDES
\nBake what you would bake. If Rashi is correct, the text would mean: \u201cBake what you want to bake of the two omers, and boil what you want to boil of it, all today; and what you have left over after you have eaten your fill, leave until morning.\u201d In the morning, when they saw that it did not spoil, they came to Moses, for they did not want to eat it the next day, even though he had permitted them to leave it over. Then in the morning he permitted them: Eat it today\u2014today only. That is why I told you that you could leave it over. Then he informed them of the reason for the commandment: You will not find it today on the plain, for today is a sabbath, holy to the Lord. It may be that all that is left means that they could eat as much as they liked on Friday, and that whatever was left would suffice for the Sabbath, for it was a divine blessing. If Ibn Ezra is correct, then they cooked an omer of it on Friday, as they always did, and ate the second omer raw on Saturday, without baking or boiling it and making it into cakes as they ordinarily did. But Rashi\u2019s suggestion is more likely. Onkelos thinks so too: \u201cWhat you are going to bake, bake; and what you are going to boil, boil.\u201d
\nExodus 16:23
\nRASHI
\nThis is what the Lord meant. Not meant, but \u201cspoke\u201d; see OJPS and the previous comment. Bake what you would bake. Whatever you want to bake, bake it all, two days\u2019 worth, today. Whatever you need to boil, boil today.
\nRASHBAM
\nThis is what the Lord meant. OJPS is more literal. This is what the Lord spoke on the first day, though I did not tell you. Moses had wanted them to be surprised when double the amount fell on Friday, so that now, on the eve of the Sabbath, he could make known to them its glory. Bake. The pointing of the word is extremely unusual. I have found nothing like it except hevu in Hosea 4:18.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThis is what the Lord meant. What He has \u201cspoken\u201d (OJPS). God has already told me that you must rest tomorrow and not do any work, even food preparation. A day of rest, a holy sabbath of the Lord. The commentators consider this a repetition of two equivalent words as in \u201cthose that sleep in the dust of the earth\u201d (Dan. 12:2). Saadia takes shabbaton, \u201ca day of rest,\u201d to be something less than \u201csabbath.\u201d In Lev. 16:31 we find the two words reversed. In my opinion the JPS translations understand the significance correctly. Shabbaton is derived from shabbat and is the more general term. The Sabbath is connected with God because it is the day on which He rested from all His work. Bake what you would bake and boil what you would boil. For a total of one omer per person. \u201cEat as much as you usually do\u201d is understood. All that is left put aside to be kept until morning. We do not know whether they ate the manna once a day or more often in smaller portions. Notice that Moses does not mention that no manna will fall the next day (he saved this secret for the following morning), and that no baking or boiling is mentioned in connection with what is left over for the Sabbath.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThis is what the Lord meant by having you miraculously gather two omers today instead of one: Tomorrow is a day of rest (Gersonides).
\nExodus 16:24\u201329
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Isn\u2019t God\u2019s complaint to Moses in v. 28 an overreaction?
\nExodus 16:24
\nRASHBAM
\nThere were no maggots in it. Which usually developed quickly.
\nExodus 16:25
\nRASHI
\nThen Moses said, \u201cEat it today, for today is a sabbath.\u201d In the morning, when they were in the habit of going out to gather the manna, they came to ask, \u201cShould we go out or not?\u201d He replied, \u201cEat what you have.\u201d Toward evening they came back and asked him, \u201cWhat about going out?\u201d He told them, \u201cToday is a sabbath.\u201d He saw that they were worried that the manna had stopped falling for good, and told them, You will not find it today on the plain. Today you will not find it, but tomorrow you will.
\nIBN EZRA
\nToday is a sabbath of the Lord. Many who lack faith have been confused by this verse. Since Moses did not tell the Israelites that the Sabbath began on the previous evening, these people assume that the Sabbath is to be observed on Saturday and Saturday night, rather than on Friday night and Saturday. These same people have interpreted \u201cthere was evening and there was morning, a first day\u201d (Gen. 1:5) after their own fashion, to mean that the first day did not end until the morning that began the second day. But they are not correct. Moses spoke to them about the daytime simply because\u2014in contrast to Europe, the land of the uncircumcised, which is culturally so different from the land of Israel\u2014it was their custom to work and to cook only during the day. You will not find it. For it did not fall today.
\nExodus 16:26
\nRASHI
\nOn the seventh day it is the sabbath\u2014there will be none. Since the first part of the verse already makes this clear, the second part of the verse was added to include the Day of Atonement and the festival days.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSix days you shall gather it. What I have told you about today is a general rule that will apply throughout your time in the wilderness.
\nExodus 16:27
\nIBN EZRA
\nOn the seventh day. Since the manna had begun to fall. To gather. To see whether Moses\u2019 words would stand up.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSome of the people went out on the seventh day to gather. Even though they did not need any more; just to see if it would be there (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 16:28
\nRASHI
\nHow long will you men refuse? As the saying goes, \u201cThe cabbage is smitten along with the thorn\u201d\u2014the good are disgraced by association with the wicked.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHow long will you men refuse? God addresses Moses as the representative of Israel; Moses was to repeat this to them. My commandments. With reference to the people who left the manna till morning (v. 20). My teachings. What He had taught them about the Sabbath by having them gather a double portion on the sixth day. The plural is used because all of the commandments and teachings are undoubtedly true just as they are written, but they also have spiritual mysteries connected with them that only the enlightened can understand. Thus each commandment is really two.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHow long will you men refuse to obey? Moses had not told them not to go out and gather; he had merely said they would not find it (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 16:29
\nRASHI
\nMark. Literally, \u201csee\u201d (OJPS). See with your eyes that the Lord in all His glory is instructing you about the Sabbath.\u2014For a miracle was done every Friday, giving them two days\u2019 food as a blessing. Let everyone remain where he is. This provided the Sages with support for the rule that one may only go four cubits outside the Sabbath limit\u2014three for one\u2019s body and one to permit stretching out the arms. Let no one leave his place. This refers to the 2,000 cubits beyond which one cannot walk outside one\u2019s town on the Sabbath. It is not specifically mentioned here, because the Sabbath limit is merely rabbinic. The essential point of the text is that those who gathered manna should not go out to do so.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMark. \u201cSee\u201d (OJPS). See the marvel that God will give you to make clear to you that He commands you to rest on the Sabbath just as He rested from creation. Let everyone remain where he is: let no one leave his place. We need the words of tradition in order to understand these expressions. The same applies to Isa. 58:13, \u201cIf you refrain from trampling the sabbath, from pursuing your affairs on My holy day; if you call the sabbath \u2018delight,\u2019 the Lord\u2019s holy day \u2018honored\u2019; and if you honor it and go not your ways nor look to your affairs, nor speak about such things.\u2026\u201d What is \u201clooking to your affairs\u201d? Which things may be spoken of and which may not be? All of this is explained in our Talmud. May God double the reward of the ancients, who have removed all doubt from us and established everything in its proper form. In context, the meaning of \u201cLet everyone remain where he is\u201d is that they should not go out to gather manna as they did on other days.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe Lord has given you the sabbath. It is not just a commandment, but also a gift, given to no one but you (Sforno).
\nExodus 16:30\u201334
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why is the taste described here as \u201clike wafers in honey\u201d (v. 31) and in Num. 11:8 as \u201clike rich cream\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why did Moses specify (vv. 32, 33) that \u201cone omer\u201d of the manna be kept?
\nExodus 16:30
\nRASHBAM
\nSo the people remained inactive on the seventh day. From now on.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe people remained inactive on the seventh day. The text tells us that from that day forth, no one ever went out on the seventh day to glean. In fact, none of them violated the Sabbath in any way except for the single episode of the man who gathered wood on the Sabbath day (Num. 15:32\u201336).
\nExodus 16:31
\nRASHI
\nIt was like coriander seed, white. Coriander seed is round, but it is not white; it was the manna that was white. It was \u201clike\u201d coriander seed in terms of its roundness, and it was also white. Wafers. Dough that is fried in honey.
\nRASHBAM
\nLike coriander seed. A kind of legume. The manna was round, like coriander seed. White. \u201cLike bdellium\u201d (Num. 11:7); coriander seed is not white. It tasted like wafers in honey. According to Num. 11:8, \u201cit tasted like rich cream.\u201d Our Sages explained that it tasted like honey to the children and like cream to the elderly. What I say is that, according to the straightforward sense, when they ate it as it was, without grinding, it tasted like wafers in honey, just as nuts are sweet before they are ground or crushed. But when they would \u201cgrind it between millstones or pound it in a mortar\u201d (Num. 11:8), it would taste like cream, similar to the oil that can be made from nuts or olives. Preparation changes the flavor. The Numbers verse literally says, \u201cIts taste became\u201d\u2014the sweet taste turned creamy. Wafers. This word tzapihit is found nowhere else; tzapahat of 1 Sam. 26:11 is a jar.
\nIBN EZRA
\nManna. Having already described its miraculous aspects, the text now turns to its qualities. Coriander. This understanding of the word is well known. But some think it refers to mustard seed rather than coriander, and I don\u2019t know how to decide between them. The word appears nowhere in the Bible but in connection with manna. Wafer. It is Saadia who explained the Hebrew word this way, and he explained it well. It tasted this way raw, and \u201clike rich cream\u201d (Num. 11:8) when cooked. These are the two tastes that Scripture has shown us.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nLike coriander seed. This defines \u201cas fine as frost\u201d (v. 14), for frost is sometimes fine and sometimes coarse (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 16:32
\nRASHI
\nThroughout the ages. When Jeremiah, in his day, would rebuke them, \u201cWhy do you not occupy yourselves with Torah?\u201d they would reply, \u201cIf we leave our jobs and occupy ourselves with Torah, what will we live on?\u201d He brought out the jar of manna and said to them, \u201cO generation, behold the word of the Lord!\u201d (Jer. 2:31). Notice that he did not say \u201cHear the word of the Lord,\u201d but \u201cSee\u201d it. \u201cYour ancestors lived on this. God has many agents who can prepare food for those who fear Him.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses said. This passage ought to have been written after the building of the Tabernacle, which is where one placed something \u201cbefore the Lord,\u201d but the text wished to keep all the miracles connected with the manna together\u2014in this case, that one jar of it lasted \u201cthroughout the ages\u201d (v. 33).
\nExodus 16:33
\nRASHI
\nJar. It is an earthenware flask, as Targum Jonathan translates it. Place it before the Lord. Before the Ark. This verse was not said until the Tent of Meeting was built, even though it is recorded here in the section about the manna.
\nRASHBAM
\nMoses said to Aaron. After the Tabernacle was erected in the second year. For that is where the Ark of the Pact was.
\nIBN EZRA
\nJar. The word occurs only in this one place; we learn its meaning from Onkelos.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nTake a jar. It was made of glass, so the manna could be seen inside it (Abarbanel). Before the Lord. Until the Tabernacle was built, they kept it before the high place where they offered sacrifice (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 16:34
\nRASHBAM
\nBefore the Pact. The Ark.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Pact. This is the explanation of \u201cbefore the Lord\u201d (v. 33)\u2014before the Ark, which was called \u201cthe Ark of the Pact\u201d because the tablets of the covenant were kept inside it.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBefore the Pact. Which Moses knew they would be commanded at Sinai to construct (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 16:35\u201317:2
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Isn\u2019t the second half of v. 35 redundant?
\n\u2666 Why is this the only journey described as proceeding \u201cby stages as the Lord would command\u201d (v. 1)? Weren\u2019t all of the Israelites\u2019 journeys made this way?
\n\u2666 Why is Moses upset (v. 2) that the people ask him for water? Who were they supposed to ask?
\nExodus 16:35
\nRASHI
\nForty years. Actually, 40 years less 30 days, for manna first began to fall only on the 15th of Iyar, and it ceased on the 15th of Nisan: \u201cOn the day after the passover offering \u2026 they ate of the produce of the country.\u2026 On that same day \u2026 the manna ceased\u201d (Josh. 5:11\u201312). But the specification of a full 40 years here tells us that the unleavened cakes that Israel brought out of Egypt, which they ate for the first month, tasted like manna to them. Until they came to a settled land. After they crossed the Jordan. For the land on the western side of the Jordan was inhabited, and good. As Moses says: \u201cLet me, I pray, cross over and see the good land on the other side of the Jordan\u201d (Deut. 3:25). The word chosen by Onkelos here also means \u201cinhabited.\u201d The border of the land of Canaan. Before they crossed the Jordan, on the steppes of Moab. The two phrases would seem to contradict one another. In fact, when Moses died on the steppes of Moab on the 7th of Adar, the manna stopped falling. They lived on the manna they had gathered that day until they brought the first sheaf of the harvest (Lev. 23:10), on the 16th of Nisan, when \u201cthey ate of the produce of the country\u201d (Josh. 5:11).
\nRASHBAM
\nTo the border of the land of Canaan. \u201cOn that same day \u2026 the manna ceased\u201d (Josh. 5:12).
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Israelites ate manna forty years. The miracle of the manna was the greatest miracle of all, for most miracles are one-time events, but this one lasted 40 years. In fact, there were 10 miracles wrapped into one: (1) the manna fell; (2) it fell only around the Israelite camp; (3) the fall of manna traveled along with the Israelites; (4) the manna they did not gather melted in the sun, but the manna they gathered did not; (5) no matter how much they gathered, everyone had the same amount; (6) a double amount fell on Fridays; (7) what fell on Friday did not spoil for an extra night and day; (8) and (9), the two miraculous tastes, like wafers with honey before it was cooked and like rich cream afterward; and (10) the jar of it kept throughout the ages did not spoil. (According to the midrash, the manna fell on Moses\u2019 account, the cloud came on Aaron\u2019s account, and the well of water that traveled with them through the wilderness came on Miriam\u2019s account. But the Israelites ate manna for 37 days after Moses\u2019 death; the cloud, in my opinion, did not stay with them after they left the Sea of Reeds; and the well is not mentioned in the Torah at all. I will have more to say about this in my comment to Num. 20:8.) Until they came to a settled land. For they were in \u201ca land no man had traversed\u201d (Jer. 2:6). Some of the Israelites ate bread once they got to \u201ca settled land,\u201d the country of the Amorite kings (for until then it was simply unavailable). Others did not eat bread until they came to the border of the land of Canaan and got to Gilgal, on the plains of Jericho, when the produce of the land of Canaan became available and the manna ceased.
\nExodus 16:36
\nRASHI
\nA tenth of an ephah. The ephah is 3 seahs, the seah is 6 kabs, the kab is 4 logs, and the log is 6 eggs. So a tenth of an ephah works out to 43.2 eggs. This is the size of a grain offering and also the minimum amount of dough from which hallah must be taken.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe omer. The quantity is given here to show that it was more than enough to satisfy one\u2019s appetite.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA tenth of an ephah. The \u201ctenth\u201d is an allusion to tithing (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 17:1
\nIBN EZRA
\nStages. Rephidim was actually the third stage on the journey. As the Lord would command. Through Moses, as I explained in my comment to 15:22. From the wilderness of Sin \u2026 Rephidim. Again the text omits intermediate encampments at Dophkah and at Alush (Num. 33:12\u201315). Since nothing in particular happened to them at these intermediate places, the text here does not bother to mention them.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nFrom the wilderness of Sin \u2026 Rephidim. The text omits the intermediate stages here because the purpose of this passage is not to describe their route but to tell the story of the grumbling. When they first entered this wilderness, they grumbled about bread; now, about water.
\nExodus 17:2
\nRASHI
\nWhy do you try the Lord? By asking whether He can provide water in a land so dry.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe people quarreled. The verb is causative; they caused a quarrel. Again, as with the manna, this was not \u201call\u201d the people. I believe that there were two groups. One group, who had no water to drink, quarreled with Moses. The other group had brought water with them from Alush and simply wanted to test God (v. 8). Give us water to drink. The plural verb shows that they said this to both Moses and Aaron. As I have already explained, Moses never spoke with the people except through Aaron. Why do you quarrel with me? He said this to the first group, implying \u201cLet us all cry out in prayer to God.\u201d Why do you try the Lord? He said this to the second group.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe people quarreled with Moses. Finding no springs at this location, they immediately began to quarrel with him. When, previously, the text says that they \u201cgrumbled,\u201d it means that they complained about their situation: \u201cWhat shall we do? What shall we eat? What shall we drink?\u201d But this was actual quarreling. They came to him and demanded: Give us water to drink. The verb is in the plural. \u201cGive us water, you and your brother Aaron. For it is your responsibility. If we die, our blood is on your hands!\u201d Why do you try the Lord? \u201cYour quarrel is a test of God, to see whether He can provide water for you. If you shut up and leave me alone and pray to Him, maybe He will answer you.\u201d In fact, testing God was exactly what they intended; see v. 7. When Moses said this, their anger abated and they waited a day or two, making do with the water they had in their containers.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGive us water to drink. The plural \u201cgive\u201d was directed not at Moses and Aaron, but at God and Moses (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 17:3\u20136
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Isn\u2019t v. 3 redundant?
\n\u2666 Isn\u2019t what Moses says to God in v. 4 an overreaction? The people\u2019s request was reasonable!
\n\u2666 Why did Moses have to \u201cpass before the people\u201d (v. 5)?
\n\u2666 The whole story of Moses getting water for the people is full of apparent inconsistencies that need to be explained.
\nExodus 17:3
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe people thirsted there for water. The sense is: When the people cried out for water and grumbled, \u201cWhy did you bring us up from Egypt?\u2026 Moses cried out to the Lord\u201d (vv. 3\u20134).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nBut the people thirsted for water; and the people grumbled against Moses. Once they were out of water, they \u201cgrumbled\u201d as they had on previous occasions when they needed something, and asked, Why did you bring us up from Egypt? When Moses saw that they were thirsty, he prayed to God and told Him of his pain at the quarrel they had had with him previously, when they grumbled (in 16:2\u20133) about the lack of food. Ibn Ezra sees two different groups here; but the correct explanation is what I have said. Us and our children. This particular expression, rather than just \u201cus,\u201d or \u201cthe whole community,\u201d was calculated to press their complaint by emphasizing the children, to make Moses hurry. For children cannot stand thirst at all, and would die in front of their parents. \u201cThe tongue of the suckling cleaves to its palate for thirst\u201d (Lam. 4:4). Our livestock. This was to remind Moses that they needed a great deal of water and that his plan needed to take that into account. \u201cOut came copious water, and the community and their beasts drank\u201d (Num. 20:11). Our Sages remark: \u201cThey compared their animals to themselves. A man\u2019s animal is his life. One who travels on the road without his animal suffers privation.\u201d
\nExodus 17:4
\nRASHI
\nBefore long. If I hesitate much longer they will be stoning me!
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey will be stoning me! The text speaks metaphorically. \u201cThey have quarreled with me so much that if they had the power they would be stoning me.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBefore long they will be stoning me! As a false prophet (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 17:5
\nRASHI
\nPass before the people. And we\u2019ll see whether they stone you. Why did you cast aspersions on My children? Take with you some of the elders of Israel. As witnesses, to see that it is by your hand that the water comes out of the rock, so the people won\u2019t say that there have been springs there since ancient times. The rod with which you struck the Nile. Why does the text mention this? The Israelites were saying that the rod could only be used for punishment; he had inflicted many plagues on Pharaoh and the Egyptians with it, both in Egypt and at the sea. But now they would see that it could be used for reward as well.
\nIBN EZRA
\nPass before the people. Some say God told him this because he had accused them of wanting to stone him. I think the point is that Moses should do it publicly, to let them in on the secret. The place was close to Mount Sinai, which was the \u201crock\u201d that he struck. The rod with which you struck the Nile. By commanding Aaron to do so.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nPass before the people. \u201cPass\u201d is used in the same sense it has in \u201cHe himself passed on ahead\u201d (Gen. 33:3) and elsewhere\u2014Moses started off before the people set out. For they were at Rephidim and the rock that the water came from was at Horeb, which is Mount Sinai, according to our Sages, or, in my opinion, a nearby city, as I shall explain in my comment to 18:1. Moses was a league or more ahead of the people on the way to Horeb, which is why God told him to take some of the elders with him. Set out. And go on until you see Me standing before you on the rock at Horeb. The rod with which you struck the Nile. By commanding Aaron to do so. It is not called \u201cthe rod that changed into a snake\u201d or \u201cthe rod with which you performed the signs,\u201d because the text wished to contrast the miracle of changing water into undrinkable blood with its opposite, changing \u201cthe flinty rock into a fountain\u201d (Ps. 114:8). Again God performs two equal and opposite miracles.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nTake with you some of the elders of Israel. Not young men, who could protect you from the stoning you imagine is about to happen to you, but elders, who would be too weak to protect you (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 17:6
\nRASHI
\nStrike the rock. Not \u201cstrike at the rock,\u201d but \u201cstrike the rock,\u201d or even more literally, \u201cstrike in the rock.\u201d This shows that the rod was made of an extremely hard substance called sapphire, which could actually split the rock.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI will be standing there. That is, you will encounter My power and strength at Horeb. Strike the rock and water will issue from it. It was to be a miracle; there was no water there until Moses struck the rock. Moses did so. The text is abbreviated and does not add \u201cthe community and their beasts drank\u201d (Num. 20:11), as it does in a later episode.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nI will be standing there before you. Because this miracle was to be a permanent one and the water would be with them, as our Sages say, throughout their stay in the desert, God\u2019s Presence appeared to him just as it did with the manna\u2014in both cases because it was a lasting miracle, not a temporary one. Moses did so. The text does not specify that \u201cthe community and their beasts drank\u201d (Num. 20:11) as on the other occasion, but obviously they did so. The people certainly did not go to Horeb to drink, for they did not get to Sinai until the third month (19:1). They sent boys with their livestock to fetch the water, as is the custom of camps of people. To me it is even plausible that the water that sprang from the rock, gushing and cold, flowed all the way to Rephidim, where they drank it. After all, \u201cHe brought forth streams from a rock and made them flow down like a river\u201d (Ps. 78:16); \u201cHe opened a rock so that water gushed forth; it flowed as a stream in the parched land\u201d (Ps. 105:41). Despite what the midrash says, \u201cHe struck the rock and waters flowed, streams gushed forth\u201d (Ps. 78:20) also describes this incident, not the one in Numbers, where the water came from a well, not a gushing spring\u2014\u201cthe well where the Lord said to Moses, \u2018Assemble the people that I may give them water\u2019 \u201d (Num. 21:16). The people drank immediately at the well, which is why their drinking is mentioned there; here it is not mentioned that they drank immediately, because they had running water that they could drink whenever they wanted. Now, according to rabbinic tradition, all the water they drank in the desert came from the well of Miriam. But perhaps Miriam\u2019s \u201cwell\u201d originally was this flowing spring, and only later, as a punishment for Moses\u2019 striking the rock, became a well.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHoreb. Since Torah is likened to water, it was proper that the water come from the same place Torah would come from (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 17:7\u20139
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Amalek come (v. 8) to fight with Israel?
\n\u2666 Why did Moses not ask God for help but simply tell Joshua to fight?
\n\u2666 Why did God not fight for the Israelites as He had at the sea?
\n\u2666 What is the meaning of \u201cpick some men for us\u201d (v. 9)?
\nExodus 17:7
\nRASHBAM
\nIs the Lord present among us? Will He give us water?
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe place was named. Or it may mean \u201che [Moses] named the place.\u201d Massah and Meribah. In keeping with Hebrew style, the first reason, quarreling, explains the last mentioned name, and then the text returns to the previous name and gives the reason for it, trying the Lord. The second group, who tried God, got Him angrier than the first group, the quarrelers, which is why He issued the command, \u201cDo not try the Lord your God, as you did at Massah\u201d (Deut. 6:16).
\nExodus 17:8
\nRASHI
\nAmalek came. This section is inserted here to say, \u201cI am always among you, and ready for all your needs. Yet you say, \u2018Is the Lord present among us or not?\u2019 [v. 7]. I swear: A dog will come and bite you, you will cry out for Me, and you\u2019ll find out where I am.\u201d It is like a man who puts his son on his shoulder and sets off down the road. The boy sees something he wants and says, \u201cDaddy, get it for me!\u201d He gets it for him, and this happens again a second and then a third time. Eventually they meet another man. The boy says to the other man, \u201cHave you seen my daddy?\u201d His father says to him, \u201cYou don\u2019t know where I am?!\u201d He throws him off and a dog comes and bites him.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAmalek. Not Esau\u2019s grandson, but a nation that dwelled in the Negev; see Num. 13:29.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAmalek came and fought with Israel. The midrash is correct in seeing this as a punishment for the people\u2019s quarreling with Moses. Amalek came to fight because they wished to show themselves superior to the Egyptians, who had perished in their conflict with the Jews. But they attacked Israel without first declaring war as kings ordinarily do (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 17:9
\nRASHI
\nPick some men. Brave men who fear sin, so that their virtue will aid them. Another reading: Men who know how to nullify sorcery. For the Amalekites were sorcerers. For us. For me and for you. Moses puts Joshua on the same level as himself. From this they derived the saying, \u201cLet your student\u2019s honor be as dear to you as your own\u201d (M. Avot 4:12). The second phrase in that mishnah, \u201cLet your friend\u2019s honor be as dear to you as your fear of your master,\u201d is derived from Num. 12:11, where Aaron says to Moses, \u201cO my lord.\u201d Aaron was actually the older brother, yet he treated his equal like his master. The third phrase in the mishnah, \u201cLet your fear of your master be like your fear of heaven,\u201d derives from Num. 11:28, where Joshua sees Eldad and Medad prophesying and says, \u201cMy lord Moses, restrain them!\u201d They deserve it, for rebelling against you is like rebelling against the Holy One! Go out and do battle. Go out of the cloud that protects us and fight. Tomorrow, at the time of the battle, I will station myself.
\nIBN EZRA
\nJoshua. He was the grandson of the chieftain Elishama son of Ammihud, who carried the standard of Ephraim. The text already calls him Joshua even though Moses has not yet changed his name from Hosea at this point in the story (see Num. 13:16). Men. That is, fighting men. Do battle. Tomorrow. On top of the hill. In my opinion, the hill was the one where he struck the rock in v. 6, that is, Mount Sinai. The fact that in 19:2 they will travel from this location, Rephidim, to the wilderness of Sinai, should not trouble you. The camp was so large that it stretched most of the way from one stop on the journey to the next. No doubt Mount Sinai was close to both of these encampments. With the rod of God in my hand. To hold up my hands in prayer.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nJoshua. Apparently Moses called him Joshua from the day when he first began to serve him; evidently \u201cMoses changed the name of Hosea son of Nun to Joshua\u201d (Num. 13:16) is telling us that the Hosea selected to be among the spies is the one whose name Moses had changed. The midrash says Moses changed his name to make it a prayer, \u201cMay God preserve you from the counsels of the spies,\u201d which tells us that Moses knew about the incident in advance. Or perhaps at that time Moses made the name change public so that from that time on everyone would call him Joshua instead of Hosea. I will station myself on the top of the hill. Moses ordered Joshua to lead the fighting so that he himself could be on top of the hill, praying and watching out for Israel\u2019s welfare in battle. The Israelites, in turn, would see him praying for them, and would feel confident and fight with courage and energy. Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer describes Moses leading the people in prayer, from the top of the hill, kneeling, prostrating himself, and raising his hands to heaven, just as one would in a synagogue. With the rod of God in my hand. This must have been the signal to bring destruction on Amalek, as when God told Joshua, \u201cHold out the javelin in your hand toward Ai, for I will deliver it into your hands\u201d (Josh. 8:18). For when Moses was holding his hands up to heaven in prayer, he would not be holding anything in them. Amalek was an extremely strong nation, and Israel was untrained in war and had never experienced it. Moreover, they were \u201cfamished and weary\u201d (Deut. 25:18). So they needed all the prayers Moses could offer them. Moses may have been afraid that Amalek would defeat them, for Amalek was a grandson of Esau, who had been given the blessing \u201cBy your sword you shall live\u201d (Gen. 27:40). The family of Esau and Amalek has been Israel\u2019s enemy from first to last: \u201cAmalek was the first of the nations\u201d to fight us (Num. 24:20), and, as our Sages tell us, we are now in the exile of Edom, that is, Esau, which will end when \u201cliberators shall march up on Mount Zion to wreak judgment on Mount Esau; and dominion shall be the Lord\u2019s\u201d (Obad. 1:21). Everything that Moses and Joshua did in the past will be done again in the future by Elijah and the Messiah son of Joseph. That is why Moses took such pains in this case.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nPick some men. Who were born in a leap month, which has no astrological sign, so they will not be subject to Amalekite sorcery. Another reading: So that our force will be equal in number to theirs (Hizkuni). Perhaps it means men of virtue, who would deserve having a miracle done for them (Gersonides). Moses did not want to give the Amalekites the honor of fighting him personally, or of fighting the entire Israelite army (Abarbanel). With the rod of God in my hand. Like a military banner, with which Moses could signal the people whether the fighters needed help or not (Bekhor Shor). To signal them when he was praying, as in the huge synagogue of Alexandria, where they would wave a scarf to let the people know it was time to say \u201cAmen\u201d (Sforno).
\nExodus 17:10\u201312
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 What is the explanation for Moses holding up his hands for victory and so forth, something he never does anywhere else in the Torah?
\n\u2666 Why did Moses have to do what he did on the top of a hill?
\n\u2666 How did getting Moses a stone to sit on (v. 12) solve the problem of his hands growing heavy?
\nExodus 17:10
\nRASHI
\nMoses, Aaron, and Hur. Hence the custom of having three people lead prayers before the ark on a fast day. For the Israelites were fasting that day. Hur was Miriam\u2019s son, and Caleb was her husband.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAaron and Hur. They are mentioned because they will be holding up Moses\u2019 hands in v. 12.
\nExodus 17:11
\nRASHI
\nWhenever Moses held up his hand. \u201cDid the hands of Moses bring victory in battle? No, it means that as long as Israel looked upward and subjected their hearts to their Father in heaven they prevailed. When they did not, they fell\u201d (M. RH 3:8).
\nRASHBAM
\nWhenever Moses held up his hand with the rod, Israel prevailed. For when military units see their banner held high\u2014their gonfalon, as we call it\u2014they prevail. And when it is cast down, they generally flee and are defeated.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWhenever Moses held up his hand. Some say that this was a signal, like the one who holds the flag in battle. But if this had been the case, Aaron or Hur could have done it, or they could simply have propped it up on the mountain high enough for everyone to be able to see it. Others think he spread out his hands in prayer. But what our predecessors the Sages have said about this is correct. It was done by divine command, just as when \u201cJoshua held out the javelin in his hand toward the city\u201d (Josh. 8:18).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWhenever he let down his hand. The straightforward explanation is that whenever his hands were too heavy to hold up, he saw that Amalek was winning, so he ordered Aaron and Hur not to let his hands down. A midrash says, \u201cDo you think Moses would let Amalek win? But it is forbidden to hold one\u2019s hands up in prayer for three hours straight.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhenever Moses held up his hand. He would hold up one hand and rest the other, then switch; but eventually both his hands got tired (Hizkuni). Whenever he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. For the Israelites took it as a signal that they were losing, and their strength left them (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 17:12
\nRASHI
\nMoses\u2019 hands grew heavy. Because he had shirked the commandment to fight Amalek and appointed Joshua to do it instead, his hands grew heavy. So they\u2014Aaron and Hur\u2014took a stone and put it under him. He sat right on the stone, not on a pillow or cushion, for he thought, \u201cWhen Israel suffers, I must suffer as well. His hands remained steady. Literally, \u201chis hands were faith.\u201d Moses\u2019 hands were raised faithfully to heaven in constant\u2014faithful\u2014prayer. Until the sun set. The Amalekites were used to figuring out astrologically the hour in which they could win. But Moses made the sun stop and confused the hours.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nSteady. The translations understand this word correctly. It is used similarly in Isa. 22:23, \u201ca firm place\u201d; Ps. 100:5, \u201cHis steadfast love\u201d; and Deut. 28:59, \u201clasting plagues.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses\u2019 hands grew heavy. Moses was an elderly man, but there is no one in the world strong enough to hold his hands in the air for as long as two hours, let alone \u201cuntil the sun set.\u201d It is a fact of nature. Steady. Some relate this word emunah to omen, \u201cbring up\u201d (Esther 2:4), as if Aaron and Hur were \u201cbringing up\u201d his hands.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHis hands remained steady. This translation is correct. But according to the Way of Truth, he held 10 fingers high to heaven to allude to the 10 sefirot, and to cleave to the aspect of Faith that was fighting for Israel. The subject of the priests\u2019 holding up their hands when they bless the people, and the mystery behind it, is also clarified by this text.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses\u2019 hands grew heavy. He may have been a large man, and he was certainly old\u2014two good reasons why his limbs would grow heavy (Gersonides). They took a stone and put it under him. Because it was even difficult for him to stay on his feet for so long (Hizkuni). To increase his height, making him more visible (Gersonides). His hands remained steady. With the result that Amalek never prevailed (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 17:13\u201315
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why the unusual choice of words that Joshua \u201coverwhelmed\u201d (v. 13) the Amalekites?
\n\u2666 Why are we told that the Amalekites were beaten by \u201cthe sword\u201d\u2014what else would we have expected them to use?
\n\u2666 Why did the document (v. 14) have to be read aloud to Joshua?
\nExodus 17:13
\nRASHI
\nJoshua overwhelmed the people of Amalek with the sword. Literally, he \u201cweakened\u201d them\u2014he did not kill them all, but cut off the heads of their heroes, leaving none but the weakest of them. \u201cWith the sword\u201d can be read as \u201cat the command, by sword.\u201d We learn from this that they did this at the command of the Shekhinah.
\nRASHBAM
\nOverwhelmed. See my comment on the etymologically related word in 32:18.
\nIBN EZRA
\nOverwhelmed. Literally, \u201cweakened.\u201d The same form of the verb is sometimes transitive, as it is here, and sometimes intransitive. The people of Amalek. Literally, \u201cAmalek and his people\u201d (OJPS). Some say Amalek was the name of their king, others that another, unnamed people had come to fight alongside Amalek.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nJoshua overwhelmed the people of Amalek. But he was unable to kill them outright because their witchcraft prevented this. Literally, \u201che weakened them,\u201d as opposed to \u201cAmalek prevailed\u201d (literally, \u201cwas strong\u201d) (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 17:14
\nRASHI
\nAs a reminder. That the Amalekites came to tangle with the Israelites first of all the nations. Read it aloud to Joshua. Who is going to be bringing Israel into the land. Literally, \u201cput it in the ears of Joshua,\u201d so that he will command the Israelites to pay back the Amalekites for this. This is a hint to Moses that it is Joshua who will be bringing the Israelites into the land, not he. I will utterly blot out. OJPS is preferable here. I am instructing you to do this because I desire to blot it out.
\nRASHBAM
\nTo Joshua. Who is going to rule them, and who will fulfill my commandment to wipe out the name of Amalek. I will utterly blot out. I want it blotted out.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord said to Moses. This passage was said in the 40th year of the wandering. The proof is that the text literally says, \u201cWrite this \u2026 in the book\u201d (OJPS)\u2014that is, the book of Torah, or perhaps in another book they had, the \u201cBook of the Wars of the Lord\u201d (Num. 21:14), which, like many other books mentioned in the Bible, we no longer have. To Joshua. Who would lead the people into the land. God knew that he would be fighting the kings of Canaan. I will utterly blot out. Amalek had angered God. For the \u201cclans of Edom\u201d (15:15) were dismayed with fear at the marvels that God had performed in Egypt and at the sea; so too were the Moabites and Philistines. But the Amalekites heard of the great might that God had wielded on behalf of His people Israel, and deliberately came from a long way off to fight with them \u201cundeterred by fear of God\u201d (Deut. 25:18).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nInscribe this in a document as a reminder. Ibn Ezra identifies this document as the \u201cBook of the Wars of the Lord,\u201d which tells of the wars that God fought for those who fear Him, and which may date to the days of Abraham. But he merely used this as a pretext. I think the \u201cdocument\u201d is the Torah. \u201cWrite this down in My Torah so the Israelites will remember what Amalek did to them.\u201d I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven! And I will get My revenge on him through My people Israel. Where this is \u201cinscribed as a reminder\u201d in the Torah is the commandment in Deut. 25:17\u201319, \u201cRemember what Amalek did to you on your journey, after you left Egypt \u2026 you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven.\u201d Read it aloud to Joshua. To command him to remind Israel about all the trouble that Amalek brought upon them. For Joshua would be the one \u201cwho knows and bears witness\u201d (Jer. 29:23). Once they fulfilled the commandment of destroying the seven nations and possessing the land, \u201cwhen the Lord your God grants you safety from all your enemies around you, in the land that the Lord your God is giving you\u201d (Deut. 25:19)\u2014if this was in Joshua\u2019s days\u2014he would remind them to blot out the memory of Amalek. But since at the end of Joshua\u2019s life \u201cvery much of the land still remained to be taken possession of\u201d (Josh. 13:1), the Amalekite wars did not begin until the reign of Saul.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nInscribe this. For if you rely on oral tradition it may be forgotten before there is a king of Israel (Hizkuni). Read it aloud to Joshua. Rather, tell him to transfer the inscription to the judge who rules after him (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 17:15
\nRASHI
\nAdonai-nissi. That is, \u201cthe Holy One\u201d performed \u201ca miracle,\u201d nes, for us here. It is not that the altar was called Adonai, \u201cLord,\u201d but that whoever mentioned the name of the altar would be remembering the miracle that God had performed. Adonai-nissi: \u201cThe Lord is our miracle.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nAdonai-nissi. For the rod of the Holy One was a nes, a banner, for us on top of the hill, and He will raise it again on the mountains to fight against Amalek, as He swore in v. 14.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses built an altar. At Rephidim. Adonai-nissi. Because the Lord had performed a nes, a miracle, there. Saadia reads the verse to say, \u201cAdonai called the place Nissi\u2014the place of my miracle.\u201d He cites several other biblical verses that he thinks follow this syntax, but they are all worthless, the opposite of the truth.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAnd named it Adonai-nissi. Moses called upon God in his prayer as Adonai-nissi, \u201cThe Lord is my banner on high\u201d (Sforno).
\nExodus 17:16
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why are we told here that \u201cThe Lord will be at war with Amalek throughout the ages\u201d (v. 16) when later (Deut. 25:19) it is the Israelites who are commanded to blot them out?
\n\u2666 Why does the story told here make it sound as if Israel won, while Deuteronomy 25 makes it sound as if Amalek won?
\nExodus 17:16
\nRASHI
\nHe said. Moses said. Hand upon the throne of the Lord! The hand of the Holy One is upraised to swear by His throne to eternal war and enmity with Amalek. Why is the word for \u201cthrone\u201d truncated here, and the word \u201cLord\u201d cut in half? The implication is that the Holy One swears that neither His name nor His throne can be complete until the name of Amalek has been completely wiped out. When it has been completely wiped out, then His name and His throne will be complete. \u201cThe enemy is no more\u2014ruins everlasting\u201d (Ps. 9:7) is a reference to Amalek, of whom the verse continues, \u201cYou have torn down their cities; their very names are lost.\u201d And what does the very next verse say? \u201cBut the Lord abides forever,\u201d with His name complete, and \u201cHe has set up His throne for judgment,\u201d with \u201cHis throne\u201d complete.
\nRASHBAM
\nHand upon the throne of the Lord! This is the oath that caused Moses to name the altar Adonai-nissi. It is like naming a person Eliezer, \u201cGod is my help,\u201d or Immanuel, \u201cGod is with us.\u201d For the Holy One raised His hand onto His throne and swore: The Lord will be at war with Amalek throughout the ages. God does the same in Deut. 32:40, \u201cLo, I raise My hand to heaven.\u201d That is the point of the straightforward sense. But some explain yad, literally \u201chand,\u201d in its metaphoric sense of \u201cpower.\u201d They understand the text to mean that when there will be power on \u201cthe Lord\u2019s throne,\u201d that is, the throne of the kings of Israel, then there will be war with Amalek. But I don\u2019t see this at all, because there is no \u201cwhen\u201d in the verse. The word they understand to mean \u201cwhen,\u201d omitted by the JPS translators, means \u201cfor,\u201d as I have explained: Moses says, I named the altar Adonai-nissi, for God swore, Hand upon the throne of the Lord! and so forth.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHand upon the throne of the Lord! Jeshua b. Judah explains this to mean, \u201cWhoever\u2019s hand first reaches the throne of God shall be the first to make war on Amalek\u201d\u2014the throne of God being the kingship of Israel, as we know from 1 Chron. 29:23, \u201cSolomon successfully took over the throne of the Lord as king.\u201d That is, it is a commandment that the first king of Israel should do so, and an allusion to Saul, \u201cthe chosen of the Lord\u201d (1 Sam. 21:6), who did so. But everyone knows how Onkelos has translated this verse\u2014as indicating an oath taken by God\u2014and he is correct. Similar examples are found in Deut. 32:40, \u201cLo, I raise My hand to heaven and say: As I live forever,\u201d and Dan. 12:7, \u201cThen I heard the man dressed in linen, who was above the water of the river, swear by the Ever-Living One as he lifted his right hand and his left hand to heaven.\u201d Lifting the hand to heaven signifies that the oath thus taken will stand as long as the heavens do. And the throne of God is eternal as well: \u201cYour throne stands firm from of old; from eternity You have existed\u201d (Ps. 93:2).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHand upon the throne of the Lord! Rashi\u2019s comment is taken from the midrash. Others take it as a reference to Saul, the first whose hand reached the throne \u201cof the Lord,\u201d that is, of Israel; and every king of Israel will have the obligation to fight Amalek throughout the ages until its name is blotted out. This is the straightforward explanation, and it is correct. B. Sanh. 20b follows this same interpretation, that this commandment is dependent on there being a king. But according to the Way of Truth, the hand on the throne of the Lord is God\u2019s war with Amalek throughout the ages. For \u201cthe hand\u201d is the attribute of judgment on high, which will be against Amalek, to blot it out, forever. The midrash about the complete name and complete throne alludes to this. The reason Amalek\u2019s punishment is so much greater than that of the other nations is that all the other nations feared God, as we know from 15:14\u201315, but Amalek went out of their way to fight against Him, \u201cundeterred by fear of God\u201d (Deut. 25:18). Moreover, as Esau\u2019s grandson, he was related to us, yet still insisted on getting involved in a quarrel that was none of his business.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe throne of the Lord. There is a disagreement about whether the Hebrew text of the phrase is to be spelled as one word\u2014kesyah\u2014or as two (Masorah). Hand upon the throne of the Lord. When the hand of Amalek is upon the throne of the Lord\u2014Jerusalem (Hizkuni). The Lord will be at war with Amalek throughout the ages. Neither Joshua, nor Saul, nor Mordecai and Esther will be able to finish them off (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 18:1
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does the text say (v. 1) that Jethro \u201cheard all that God had done\u201d but specify only bringing out the Israelites from Egypt, rather than the miraculous things?
\n\u2666 Why doesn\u2019t the text specify any of the things that God had done \u201cfor Moses\u201d?
\nExodus 18:1
\nRASHI
\nJethro. He had seven names: Reuel (2:18); Jether (4:18), because he made an addition (yiter) to the Torah (vv. 21\u201323); Jethro, because when he converted and began to observe the commandments he, like Abraham and Sarah, was given an additional letter to his name; Hobab, because he loved (hibeb) the Torah; Heber, Kenite, and Putiel. Judg. 4:11, \u201cHobab, father-in-law of Moses,\u201d proves that Hobab is Jethro. According to the Sifrei, Reuel was Jethro\u2019s father, and though Reuel is called their \u201cfather\u201d in 2:18, it really means something like \u201cPoppa,\u201d a nickname for their grandfather. Moses\u2019 father-in-law. Here it was Jethro who got respect by being related to Moses; \u201cI am the king\u2019s father-in-law!\u201d Previously, it was Moses who gained status by connecting himself with Jethro: \u201cMoses went back to his father-in-law Jether\u201d (4:18). Heard. What did he hear that made him come to Moses? He heard about the splitting of the sea and the war with Amalek. All that God had done. By sending down manna, giving them water, and saving them from Amalek. For Moses and for Israel. Moses by himself was worth as much as Israel. How the Lord had brought Israel out from Egypt. This was greater than all the rest.
\nRASHBAM
\nAll that God had done for Moses. That Pharaoh had not harmed him, and that God had exalted him in the eyes of Pharaoh and his courtiers, and had performed miracles for Israel through him.
\nIBN EZRA
\nJethro \u2026 heard. Saadia thinks Jethro came to Sinai before the giving of the Torah, but in my opinion, he came only in the second year, after the building of the Tabernacle. There are a number of proofs for this. For v. 12 says, \u201cAaron came with all the elders of Israel to partake of the meal before God with Moses\u2019 father-in-law,\u201d which implies God\u2019s Presence in the Tabernacle. In Deuteronomy, Moses dates the appointment of these subsidiary judges to a time just after God tells them, \u201cYou have stayed long enough at this mountain\u201d (Deut. 1:6). Jethro could not have stayed with them for months and only then given this advice, for v. 13 here tells us that he gave it the very next day after his arrival. The fact that in Num. 10:29 Moses tells Hobab\u2014who in my opinion is Jethro, as I will explain in my comment to that verse\u2014that they are about to set out \u201cfor the place of which the Lord has said, \u2018I will give it to you\u2019 \u201d also points to the fact that Jethro\u2019s visit occurred much later. Moreover, Moses could not have said \u201cI make known the laws and teachings of God\u201d (v. 16) before the giving of the Torah. In any case, as ch. 19 shows, the Israelites arrived at the mountain on the 1st of Sivan, and there was no time for the events of ch. 18 to take place before the giving of the Torah on the 6th of Sivan. The Jethro chapter was juxtaposed, out of chronological order, to the end of ch. 17 (which should have continued immediately with \u201con the third new moon\u201d of 19:1) to contrast the wickedness of Amalek with the goodness of Jethro, whose descendants, the Kenites, lived among the Amalekites in Saul\u2019s time. It needed to be made clear that the Kenites were not involved in God\u2019s war \u201cthroughout the ages\u201d (17:16) with Amalek. All that God had done. The God who, even before Moses, was known throughout the world. Israel His people. Or perhaps \u201chis,\u201d Moses\u2019, people. How the Lord had brought Israel out. Here the text switches to the name revealed to Moses, for only on account of the miracles performed by the Lord did Israel go forth from Egypt.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nOur Sages disagree about this section. Some say that Jethro came before the giving of the Torah, in the order given by the text, and others that he came after the giving of the Torah. The latter position is definitely aided by v. 5; \u201cwhere he was encamped\u201d refers to the year-long encampment there. The \u201claws and teachings of God\u201d (v. 15) were those given at Mount Sinai. V. 27 tells about Jethro\u2019s departure, which did not take place until the second year of the desert wandering (Num. 10:11, 29\u201330). Others point out that, according to Deuteronomy 1, Jethro\u2019s advice to set up a system of judges was followed just before they left Horeb. If all this is true, then we must seek the reason why this episode is described here, out of its chronological order. According to Ibn Ezra, it was juxtaposed with the story of Amalek to remind us, when we go to wipe out Amalek, not to include the Kenites who are allied with them, because they are Jethro\u2019s descendants. That is why Saul warned them to withdraw before he attacked the Amalekites.
\nBut though the text says that Jethro had heard about the exodus from Egypt, it does not say that he had heard about the giving of the Torah, one of the greatest marvels that was ever done for them (see Deut. 4:32\u201333). Moses, too, tells Jethro all about the journey from Egypt, to which Jethro replies, \u201cNow I know that the Lord is greater than all gods\u201d (v. 11). Why doesn\u2019t Moses tell him about the revelation at Sinai, so that he will know that God is true, and His Torah is true, and there is no one but He? Perhaps Jethro set out immediately after hearing about the exodus, and arrived after the giving of the Torah, but so soon afterward that it was obvious he would be told, and it did not need to be recorded. But to me it is more plausible to accept the order in which the Torah is written, and to say that Jethro came while they were at Rephidim, before the giving of the Torah, as the Mekilta has it. We know from Moses\u2019 bringing the sheep there (3:1) and from Aaron\u2019s meeting him there (4:27) that the mountain of God was on the way to Midian and not far from it. Jethro got as far as the mountain and \u201csent word to Moses\u201d (v. 6), and Moses came from Rephidim to meet him. So there is no need to make the action of v. 6 precede that of v. 5. The explanation I have given is the correct one. It appears to me that Jethro\u2019s departure in v. 27 took place in the first year, and that he returned later. He may have gone back to Midian to convert his family and then returned to Moses while the latter was still at the mountain of God, which, as I have explained, was not far from Midian. If you read the passage in Numbers 10 carefully, you will note that Moses implores him to stay, and that it does not actually say that he left. It would appear that he listened to Moses and did not leave after all. This is certainly the opinion of our Sages, who say that the pasture land of Jericho was given to him and his descendants, the Rechabites, as a reward for accompanying them; Rashi says so himself in his comment to Num. 10:32. So he must have returned to Moses.
\nFor Moses and for Israel His people. For He enabled Moses to keep presenting himself before Pharaoh without fear, and to bring the plagues upon him so that the people could leave Egypt with Moses as their king. (Thus it is \u201chis,\u201d Moses\u2019, people.) As the Sages point out, the expression shows that Israel was worth as much as Moses, and Moses as much as Israel. How the Lord had brought Israel out. Jethro heard all that \u201cGod\u201d\u2014which was the name that Jethro had previously known\u2014had done, but he now learned from Moses that it had been done by \u201cthe Lord.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nJethro \u2026 heard all that God had done. He could see that God had brought them out of Egypt. But he heard all the details, which were no longer observable (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:2\u20135
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why are the names of Moses\u2019 sons mentioned and explained here (vv. 3\u20134)?
\nExodus 18:2
\nRASHI
\nAfter she had been sent home. See my comment to 4:27.
\nRASHBAM
\nAfter she had been sent home. After Moses sent her back from Egypt. But we have not seen him sending her back to his father-in-law\u2019s house. Some explain the literal Hebrew here, \u201cafterward, her sending,\u201d to mean \u201cafterward, he sent her dowry to her.\u201d (The word ahar means \u201cafterward\u201d in Gen. 22:13, Lev. 15:28, and Ps. 68:26; \u201csending\u201d refers to a dowry in 1 Kings 9:16.) This would seem to be the straightforward sense, for we have no biblical texts that deal with Moses sending her home. Had this happened, then instead of suddenly having Jethro let her and her sons go off into the wilderness, the text ought to have told us (right after 4:26, the end of the \u201cbridegroom of blood\u201d section), \u201cAfter this, Moses sent her back to her father\u2014her and her sons.\u201d It should have been inserted parenthetically, like \u201cHam being the father of Canaan\u201d in Gen. 9:18.
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses\u2019 wife. She is identified this way, rather than as Jethro\u2019s daughter, because Moses was more eminent than her father. After she had been sent home. Some say this means after Moses had sent her home to her father\u2019s house from the journey to Egypt in ch. 4. Others take this \u201csending\u201d to refer to divorce, as it does in Deut. 24:1, where the husband \u201csends\u201d his wife out of the house. Jeshua understands it to mean, \u201cafter she had been given her dowry,\u201d following the usage in 1 Kings 9:16. This seems plausible to me.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAfter she had been sent home. Since at the last mention of Moses\u2019 wife the text says that he was taking her and his sons to Egypt (4:20), it is necessary to mention here that he had sent her home to her father\u2019s house. The text may be saying that Jethro, having heard what God did for Moses, was now bringing her back to him, although he had sent her home. For it was now worth following the king wherever he might go.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nJethro \u2026 took Zipporah. Rather, Jethro had taken her \u201cback to her dowry,\u201d the land she had been given in Midian when she married Moses (Bekhor Shor). After she had been sent home. Without this verse, we would never know Moses had sent her home. With it, we realize that, when Israel was in trouble and Jethro was at ease, Moses sent her home (Hizkuni). Literally, \u201cafter her sending\u201d\u2014after Zipporah had sent to find out where the Israelites would be camping, Jethro realized that there was no point in trying to meet them until they reached the mountain of God (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:3\u20134
\nIBN EZRA
\nOf whom one was named Gershom \u2026 and the other was named Eliezer. Literally \u201cthe one \u2026 the one\u201d; but the text sometimes says this instead of \u201cthe one \u2026 the other\u201d (e.g., 1 Sam. 14:4). I have already explained in my comment to 4:20 that Eliezer was the youngest, just eight days old when Moses left Midian for Egypt. How then could Moses give the reason for his name as He delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh? One would think this name should have been given to the older son. But you should know that, even after fleeing to Midian, Moses was still afraid of Pharaoh, for Egypt and Midian were at peace with each other. Only once God told him \u201cAll the men who sought to kill you are dead\u201d (4:19) could he be sure that God had saved him from the sword of Pharaoh. The form \u201cGershom\u201d is unexpected, but names are not linguistically as strict as is the conjugation of verbs.
\nExodus 18:3
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHer two sons. This is not the moment in the story when they were born; but there was no chance to record the name of Eliezer earlier, as I have explained in my comment to 4:20. The text now wishes to record the kindnesses God did for Moses, and how Moses had thanked Him for saving him from Pharaoh. Now he was king over Israel, and God had drowned Pharaoh and all his army in the sea.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI have been a stranger. Really \u201cI am a stranger\u201d (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 18:4
\nRASHI
\nHe delivered me from the sword of Pharaoh. When Dathan and Abiram revealed that Moses had killed the Egyptian and he was to have his head cut off, God made his neck like marble.
\nExodus 18:5
\nRASHI
\nIn the wilderness. We already know that Moses is in the wilderness. This is written to praise Jethro, whose heart moved him to leave his position of glory in the world to go out to the barren wilderness in order to hear words of Torah.
\nIBN EZRA
\nJethro \u2026 Moses\u2019 sons and wife. The text teaches manners. First came Jethro, then Moses\u2019 sons, then the woman, as is proper. Where he was encamped. Rather, \u201cwhere he had been encamped\u201d for a long time.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWhere he was encamped. Literally, \u201cwhere he was camping\u201d\u2014where he was always camping, all the way back to the time when he had been a shepherd with Jethro\u2019s flock (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 18:6\u20139
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Moses tell his father-in-law (v. 8) the things that, according to v. 1, he had already heard?
\nExodus 18:6
\nRASHI
\nHe sent word to Moses. Literally, \u201cAnd he said unto Moses\u201d (OJPS); but NJPS has the sense correctly. I, your father-in-law Jethro, am coming to you, with your wife and her two sons. If you will not come out to meet us on my account, come out on your wife\u2019s; if not on her account, on that of her two sons.
\nRASHBAM
\nHe sent word to Moses. The Hebrew is to be understood as follows: \u201cJethro said to Moses [by messenger].\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nHe sent word to Moses. Rather, \u201cHe had said to Moses\u201d\u2014by a messenger or in writing\u2014before his arrival in v. 5. Your wife. Jethro mentioned her before the boys because her arrival was the point of the message.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHe sent word to Moses. In a letter in which these words were written, though the Hebrew literally says, \u201cHe said to Moses.\u201d For a messenger would not have spoken to Moses in the first person (\u201cI am coming to you\u201d) but in the third (\u201cYour father-in-law is coming to you\u201d). Jethro would not have referred to himself in speech as \u201cI, your father-in-law Jethro,\u201d but would simply have said, \u201cI have come to you\u201d and so forth. For Moses obviously would have recognized him. See 2 Chron. 2:10, \u201cHuram, king of Tyre, said to Solomon in writing.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHe sent word to Moses. In Egypt, when he took Zipporah and the boys back to Midian, Jethro had told Moses he would come to him after Moses brought the Israelites out of Egypt (Bekhor Shor). This was a matter of politeness; it would give Moses time to prepare a place for them to stay (Sforno). Her two sons. If, as some think, this whole episode with Jethro took place only after the giving of the Torah, it would mean that Gershom and Eliezer were not present during the giving of the Torah. The fact that they are never mentioned throughout the rest of the Torah gives some plausibility to this (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 18:7
\nRASHI
\nMoses went out. Jethro received great honor on this occasion. For when Moses went out, Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu went out too. And who could see all of these going out and not go out along with them? He bowed low and kissed him. I do not know who bowed to whom. But when it goes on to say, Each asked after the other\u2019s welfare\u2014more literally, \u201cA man asked after the welfare of his friend\u201d\u2014I know that the \u201cman\u201d is Moses, for Num. 12:3 refers to him as \u201cthe man Moses.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nTo meet his father-in-law. Out of respect for Jethro, and for his wisdom. But Moses did not go \u201cto meet\u201d his wife and children, because this is not something a respectable man does. He bowed low. Logically, the one who went forth would be the one who bowed down. Each asked after the other\u2019s welfare. The text makes Jethro Moses\u2019 equal because of his great wisdom. They went into the tent. Moses\u2019 tent, that is, the Tent of Meeting.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses went out to meet his father-in-law. Out of respect for him, and for the efforts he had made to come see him. But he did not go out to meet his wife and children, for it is unseemly for a man to go out to meet his wife, let alone his children (Abarbanel). Moses did not pull rank on him, remembering how well Jethro had treated him when he was in trouble (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:8
\nRASHI
\nMoses then recounted to his father-in-law. In order to draw his heart near to Torah. All the hardships. At the sea, and with Amalek.
\nRASHBAM
\nAll the hardships that had befallen them. Pharaoh\u2019s pursuit, and the water, manna, and meat that the Holy One had given them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHardships. This word, t\u2019la\u2019ah, may be etymologically connected to \u201cthe Egyptians will find it impossible [nil\u2019u] to drink the water of the Nile\u201d (7:18); the t and n are prefixes. The meaning would be, \u201can evil impossible to bear,\u201d or perhaps \u201cto describe.\u201d The reference is to the pursuit by the Egyptians and the encounter with Amalek.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nEverything that the Lord had done to Pharaoh. Jethro had heard only about the slaying of the first-born and the Israelites\u2019 despoiling of the Egyptians, and did not think it right; once Moses told him the whole sequence of events, he admitted that God had acted justly (Gersonides). The hardships. Hunger, thirst, and the war with Amalek (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:9
\nRASHI
\nJethro rejoiced. The straightforward meaning of the unusual word va-yihad is as translated. But the midrash takes it to imply that his flesh turned to goosebumps (hiddudim) with horror at the destruction of the Egyptians. That is why people say, \u201cDon\u2019t slur an Aramean in front of even a 10th-generation convert.\u201d All the kindness. The manna, the water, and the Torah. And greater than all of these, He delivered them from the Egyptians. For up to now Egypt was shut up so tight that not a single slave could escape; and now 600,000 had left.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe kindness that the Lord had shown Israel when he delivered them. For according to Gen. 15:13, they were still supposed to be enslaved (Hizkuni). He did not rejoice over what had happened from the perspective that it was bad for the Egyptians, only from the perspective that it was good for Israel (Gersonides).
\nExodus 18:10\u201312
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does Jethro\u2019s reply (v. 10) contain a repetition?
\nExodus 18:10
\nRASHI
\nWho delivered you from the Egyptians. A tough people. And from Pharaoh. A tough king. From under the hand of the Egyptians. Translate as does Onkelos, \u201cfrom under the tyranny of the Egyptians.\u201d The \u201chand\u201d refers to their dominion over them\u2014that is, slavery.
\nRASHBAM
\nWho delivered you, Moses and Aaron, from the Egyptians and from Pharaoh, and who delivered the people from under Egyptian enslavement.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWho delivered you. Moses and Aaron. Who delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. Delivering them from slavery in Egypt, and from the Egyptian army by splitting the sea.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWho delivered you from the Egyptians and from Pharaoh. It is a great miracle that Pharaoh and his people did not kill you, for great plagues came against them in their land on your account. The miracle was particularly great with regard to Moses, which is why Jethro speaks in the second person, specifying \u201cyou,\u201d Moses, as well as the people. Who delivered the people from under the hand of the Egyptians. This was a separate miracle, their leaving Egypt for eternal freedom. Ibn Ezra thinks \u201cyou\u201d refers to Moses and Aaron, which is why the people are mentioned separately.
\nExodus 18:11
\nRASHI
\nNow I know. I acknowledged Him in the past, but now even more so. The Lord is greater than all gods. This tells us that there was not a single form of idol worship that Jethro had not tried. Yes, by the result of their very schemes against the people. As the Targum explains, \u201cIn exactly the same manner that the Egyptians wished to judge Israel, they themselves were judged.\u201d They intended to make them perish by water, and that is how they themselves perished. The verb zadu, translated \u201cdealt proudly\u201d by OJPS, is really \u201cdealt wickedly,\u201d the source of the \u201cschemes\u201d of the NJPS translation. But our Sages take it as the same verb used in \u201cJacob boiled [va-yazed] pottage\u201d (Gen. 25:29)\u2014\u201cThey were cooked in their own pot.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nThan all gods. For they have no power to revenge the distress of those who believe in them. Yes, by the result. Rather, \u201cbecause for everything that the Egyptians schemed against the Israelites, the evil rebounded against them.\u201d That is essentially the straightforward meaning.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNow I know. See my comment to 3:15. By the result of their very schemes against the people. Rather, \u201cbecause they acted presumptuously toward them.\u201d All this was because the Egyptians acted presumptuously toward the people by imposing ruthless slavery upon them. As Neh. 9:10 says, \u201cYou performed signs and wonders against Pharaoh, all his servants, and all the people of his land, for You knew that they acted presumptuously toward them\u201d\u2014like a man who acts willfully and presumptuously.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nYes, by the result of their very schemes. A difficult phrase in Hebrew. What it means is, \u201cBy the fact that the Egyptians schemed against the Israelites, I know that the Lord is \u2018greater than all the gods.\u2019 \u201d Since it was God who decreed that the Israelites be \u201censlaved and oppressed\u201d (Gen. 15:13), the Egyptians would not have deserved such a great punishment for it except that they schemed against them, intending to wipe them off the face of the earth. It was their attempt to kill off the male children by throwing them into the Nile that earned them the punishment that would utterly destroy them. \u201cI will execute judgment on the nation they shall serve\u201d (Gen. 15:14). God read their minds and took revenge on them for what they had schemed to do. For God sees into the heart, and \u201cis vengeful and fierce in wrath\u201d (Nah. 1:2) to \u201csecure justice for those who are wronged\u201d (Ps. 146:7); none can oppose Him. What Onkelos says, \u201cThe Egyptians themselves were judged with the judgment they intended to bring against Israel,\u201d refers to their being drowned in punishment for throwing the children into the Nile. For that was beyond the call of making the Israelites \u201censlaved and oppressed.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nBy the result of their very schemes. Better, their \u201cscheming\u201d; the verb refers in rabbinic Hebrew to the deliberate commission of a sin (Kimhi).
\nExodus 18:12
\nRASHI
\nA burnt offering. The Hebrew word, olah, implies that it goes entirely up (oleh) in smoke. Sacrifices. Peace offerings. Aaron came with all the elders of Israel. Where was Moses, who had gone out to meet him and caused him to get all this honor in the first place? He served them the meal. Before God. We learn from this that the enjoyment one gets at a festive meal where scholars are present is comparable to enjoying the radiance of the Shekhinah.
\nRASHBAM
\nAaron came with all the elders of Israel to partake of the meal before God with Moses\u2019 father-in-law. They came out of respect for Jethro. Moses did not need to be mentioned, for \u201cthe tent\u201d of v. 7 was his tent.
\nIBN EZRA
\nSacrifices. Peace offerings. For God. For now the Lord became Jethro\u2019s God. Aaron came with all the elders. There was no need to mention Moses, because it was his tent. The meal. The peace offerings. Before God. For Moses\u2019 tent was just east of the Tent of Meeting.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nJethro \u2026 brought a burnt offering and sacrifices for God. All this was before they came to Mount Sinai. It might also be explained by saying that the text tells the whole story of Jethro here, and that this took place only after he had been with them for a long time, and had converted to Judaism by means of circumcision, immersion, and the offering of sacrifice, just as converts are supposed to do. Yet Jethro still sacrifices to \u201cGod,\u201d not to \u201cthe Lord,\u201d something you will not find mentioned in connection with any of the sacrifices in Leviticus (as I shall explain in my comment to Lev. 1:9, with the help of God). Aaron came with all the elders of Israel to partake of the meal. Celebrating Jethro\u2019s circumcision and conversion.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nJethro \u2026 brought a burnt offering and sacrifices. This is evidence that the episode took place after the altar was built and the Tabernacle was erected (Gersonides). He brought these offerings on the altar called \u201cAdonai-nissi,\u201d which Moses had built in 17:15 (Abarbanel). As a sign that he was accepting the yoke of God\u2019s kingship (Sforno). Aaron came with all the elders of Israel. Moses was already there, since Jethro was staying with him (Hizkuni). To partake of the meal before God. To partake of the meal that was before God, that is, the sacrifices of well-being (Hizkuni). \u201cBefore God\u201d implies that either Moses\u2019 tent was next to the Tent of Meeting, as Ibn Ezra says; or that the Shekhinah was always present in Moses\u2019 tent; or that they were striving to serve Him and draw as close to Him as possible (Gersonides). Before the altar where the sacrifices had been offered, either \u201cAdonai-nissi\u201d or another altar whose construction is not mentioned (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:13\u201314
\nExodus 18:13
\nRASHI
\nNext day. As we have learned in the Sifrei, it was the day after the Day of Atonement. \u201cThe morrow\u201d (OJPS) must mean the day after Moses came down from the mountain, which forces you to admit that it was the day after the Day of Atonement. For before the giving of the Torah, it would be impossible to say \u201cI make known the laws and teachings of God,\u201d as Moses does in v. 16. But Moses did not sit in judgment over the people between the giving of the Torah and the Day of Atonement. For he came down the mountain and broke the tablets (32:19) on the 17th of Tammuz. Early the next day he went back up. He spent 80 days on the mountain and came down on the Day of Atonement. This section of the Torah is not in chronological order; it took place in the second year of the wandering. For even one who thinks Jethro came to the Israelites before the giving of the Torah admits that he did not leave until the second year; yet that departure is recorded in v. 27 of our passage. Notice that Hobab is on the scene in Numbers 10. If the departure mentioned in v. 27 took place before the giving of the Torah, where is it recorded that he returned? Some think Hobab was Jethro\u2019s son, but he was Jethro himself, for he is identified as Moses\u2019 father-in-law in Judg. 4:11. Moses sat \u2026 while the people stood. He sat, as a king would do, while they stood. This disrespect of the Israelites made Jethro uncomfortable, and he criticized Moses for it: \u201cWhy do you sit alone, while all the people stand about you?\u201d (v. 14). From morning until evening. Could this be literally true? No, but Scripture treats every judge who rules in accordance with truth for even a single hour as if he had spent the entire day busying himself with Torah, and as if he were God\u2019s partner in creation, when \u201cthere was evening and there was morning, a first day\u201d (Gen. 1:5).
\nRASHBAM
\nAs magistrate among the people. Even if Jethro came before the giving of the Torah, they had always had monetary disputes that needed to be resolved by someone. Our Sages, of course, said (on the basis of 15:25) that the laws concerning the judicial system were given to them at Marah. But it would appear that Jethro came after the giving of the Torah. V. 5 says that Moses \u201cwas encamped at the mountain of God\u201d; compare this with \u201cHaving journeyed from Rephidim, they entered the wilderness of Sinai and encamped in the wilderness. Israel encamped there in front of the mountain\u201d (19:2). If they are already encamped at the mountain of God in our passage, it must have taken place after the journey from Rephidim. But it was put here out of sequence in order to keep it from interrupting the commandments passages. From morning until evening. Since he alone was the magistrate for the entire people and had no assistants.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNext day. The day after Jethro\u2019s arrival. Moses sat. As was his custom. From morning until evening. \u201cMorning\u201d technically means sunrise, though the word is also used, casually, to indicate dawn. Similarly, true evening begins at sunset, but the word is casually used to indicate full darkness. Experts in natural science and astronomy agree that the extent of daytime is the period during which the disk of the sun is completely above the horizon on either side.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nNext day. Literally, \u201con the day after\u201d\u2014the day after the things just related. But the Mekilta takes it to mean the day after the Day of Atonement. The Mekilta does not mean literally the day after the Day of Atonement, for they would not have eaten on the Day of Atonement\u2014if they had the Day of Atonement at all in that first year, before being commanded to observe it. Since the second set of tablets was given on the Day of Atonement, and since on the day after that Moses came down from the mountain and told the Israelites all the commandments that God had given him on Mount Sinai, it could hardly have been a day when he sat in judgment of them from morning to evening. It could not have taken place on the day after the Day of Atonement in the second year, either. For according to Numbers 10, Jethro had already declared his intention to leave in the second month of that year, five months before the Day of Atonement. What the Mekilta means is that it was on a day after the Day of Atonement\u2014not the day after. For they had not had a day free for judging the people from the time they arrived at Mount Sinai until after the Day of Atonement of that first year.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nNext day. Moses occupied himself with his father-in-law, wife, and children only on the day of their arrival; the very next day he was back at work (Abarbanel). Moses sat. The point is not that he was sitting down but that (as the word is used in Deut. 1:46) he had to \u201cstay\u201d as magistrate all day (Hizkuni). A judge must be seated in order to settle himself fully into the matter that is brought before him (Gersonides). The people stood. But the disputants ought rightly to stand, in order not to be able to settle themselves comfortably enough to find arguments that would contravene the truth (Gersonides).
\nExodus 18:14
\nRASHBAM
\nWhy do you act alone? That is why all the people stand about you from morning until evening.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHow much he had to do for the people. Rather, \u201call that he did to the people\u201d (OJPS)\u2014making them stand from morning until evening. Rashi thinks Jethro considers Moses rude for sitting while the others stand, but Moses was beyond doubt too great to have such a thing said of him; Aaron, who was great himself and older than Moses, treated Moses deferentially. Moses did the right thing, for the judge sits while the participants in the case stand: \u201cThe two parties to the dispute shall stand before the Lord\u201d (Deut. 19:17). Jethro was asking why Moses sat alone, without other judges to assist him. Why. Ibn Janah says that madu\u2019a, \u201cwhy?\u201d, is a contraction of mah de\u2019ah, \u201cwhat is your thinking?
\nExodus 18:15\u201318
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How is it that Jethro had to suggest such an obvious solution as appointing qualified judges (vv. 17\u201323) to Moses, the master of the prophets and the wisest of the sages?
\nExodus 18:15\u201316
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses replied. I am doing two things. First, the people come to me to inquire of God. That is, to inquire about His Torah. Second, when they have a dispute, it comes before me. Corresponding to this second demand on him, I decide between one person and another. Corresponding to the first demand, I make known the laws and teachings of God.
\nExodus 18:15
\nRASHI
\nTo inquire of God. As Onkelos puts it, \u201cto demand instruction\u201d from God, to seek learning from the Almighty.
\nRASHBAM
\nIt is because the people come to me to inquire of God. I alone must inquire of God. There is no one among them who is used to speaking with God except for me.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe people come to me to inquire of God. The reason they must stand and wait the greater part of the day is that they come before me for so many different things\u2014praying for the sick and telling them where to find their lost objects. This is the meaning of \u201cinquiring of God.\u201d It is used similarly of the prophets; see 1 Sam. 9:9 and 2 Kings 8:8, as well as my comment to Gen. 25:22. Moses says \u201cGod\u201d rather than \u201cthe Lord,\u201d because he is speaking to his father-in-law, who uses that term. It may also be because he is speaking about judging, for Deut. 1:17 says, \u201cjudgment is God\u2019s.\u201d As our Sages are always reminding us, \u201cGod\u201d refers to the divine aspect of justice. In v. 16 he adds, \u201cMoreover, I judge them and teach them Torah.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses replied. His words reveal that he filled four roles: prophet, king, teacher, and judge, the first three of which no one else could help him with (Abarbanel). The people come to me to inquire of God. Throughout this section, the reference is not to individual cases, but to the leaders of the people who came to Moses on public business (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:16
\nRASHI
\nIt comes before me. Not \u201cit,\u201d but \u201che\u201d\u2014the one who has the complaint comes before me.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe laws and teachings of God. Those that had already been given to them in the \u201cfixed rule\u201d of 15:25 (Hizkuni). Anyone could derive those commandments that reason teaches, but only Moses could tell them the laws and teachings of God, which no amount of wisdom and study could derive (Gersonides). By the time I have finished with public business, the poor people who are seeking justice have waited until evening (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:17
\nRASHI
\nMoses\u2019 father-in-law. He is referred to this way out of respect\u2014\u201cthe father-in-law of the king.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe thing you are doing is not right. In my opinion.\u2014And he gave grounds for his opinion.
\nExodus 18:18
\nRASHI
\nYou will surely wear yourself out. The translation of this difficult phrase, correctly, follows Onkelos. The same verb means \u201cwithered\u201d in Jer. 8:13 and Isa. 34:4. \u201cYourself\u201d is literally \u201cyou also\u201d\u2014\u201calso\u201d meaning Aaron, Hur, and the 70 elders as well. For the task is too heavy for you. Its burden is greater than your strength.
\nRASHBAM
\nYou will surely wear yourself out. This phrase navol tibol comes from the same root as navlah, \u201clet us confound their speech\u201d (Gen. 11:7). Your speech is confused trying to answer so many people all at once. And their speech is confused, too\u2014this one and that one crying out simultaneously. You do not have the power to answer all of them in orderly fashion.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou will surely wear yourself out. You will (metaphorically) \u201cwilt\u201d like a leaf (Isa. 1:30). That is, he will fall down with exhaustion. As well. This also applies to what follows it: For the task is too heavy for you as well. Do it. A grammatically unusual word; this is an irregular verb but it is formed here as if it were a regular one.
\nExodus 18:19\u201321
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Since up to that time Moses had been able to judge the whole people, why were chiefs (v. 21) of anything smaller than 1,000 necessary\u2014let alone chiefs of 10?
\n\u2666 Why did Jethro not suggest that \u201cwise\u201d men be appointed?
\nExodus 18:19\u201320
\nRASHBAM
\nGod be with you! Rather, \u201cGod will be with you,\u201d that is, \u201cyou will be able to bear up\u201d (v. 23). You represent the people before God. For the cases where it is necessary to inquire of God, you will hear what the Holy One tells you, and enjoin it upon them. This corresponds to \u201cHave them bring every major dispute to you\u201d of v. 22. But the other cases, which are easily understood by the wise men of Israel whom you will appoint for them\u2014\u201clet them decide every minor dispute themselves. Make it easier for yourself\u201d (v. 22).
\nExodus 18:19
\nRASHI
\nI will give you counsel, and God be with you! In that counsel. That is, \u201cI advise you to go and consult with the Almighty.\u201d You represent the people before God. You should represent them before God, and inquire of Him about the rules of justice. The disputes. The translation is correct.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod be with you! If you do this, God will be with you and will help you. Before God. Literally, \u201cbefore the god.\u201d \u201cGod\u201d is really a common noun, but it is used so frequently as a capitalized, proper noun that the Sages have made it one of the holy names that cannot be erased. The preposition mul indicates that Moses is acting here as intermediary from God\u2019s side; the second \u201cbefore God\u201d (\u201cunto God\u201d in OJPS) has him on the people\u2019s side. The disputes. If they are difficult ones, as Jethro explains in v. 22.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nGod be with you! See the comments of Rashi and Ibn Ezra. You represent the people before God. To pray to Him on their behalf. You bring the disputes before God. Rather, \u201cthe things\u201d that they request. Jethro concedes that it is Moses who must \u201cinquire of God\u201d (v. 15). He may also be giving him another piece of advice: You stay \u201cbefore God,\u201d in the Tent of Meeting, ready to inquire of Him. Do not do this in the same place where you sit in judgment.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nI will give you counsel, and God be with you! If you follow my counsel, the task will never be so heavy as to interfere with your cleaving to God (Gersonides).
\nExodus 18:20
\nIBN EZRA
\nEnjoin upon them. Literally, \u201cwarn them,\u201d with the meaning here of \u201cmake sure they take care to observe.\u201d (This corresponds to what Moses said in v. 16 about making God\u2019s teachings known.) See Ezek. 3:21, where the man who is \u201cwarned\u201d not to sin \u201ctakes warning,\u201d that is, takes care. \u201cThem\u201d is an unusual compound word. The laws and teachings. Those about which there is some question. For it is a huge task to teach them all \u201cthe practices they are to follow.\u201d Moses is to teach them the commandments that involve the heart, for they are the essence of Torah: to love God and cleave to Him; to fear Him and to follow Him; to circumcise the foreskin of the heart; not to hate one\u2019s brother, take vengeance, or bear a grudge. As Moses says, \u201cthe thing is very close to you, in your mouth and in your heart, to observe it\u201d (Deut. 30:14). There are many such. The practices they are to follow. This refers primarily to the ritual commandments, for most of which the ritual action invokes some other value; I will explain each one in its place.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe way they are to go. According to the Teaching and the Commandment that you instruct them and enjoin upon them. Again, Jethro concedes that it is Moses\u2019 job to \u201cmake known the laws and teachings of God\u201d (v. 16), and adds his advice to \u201cwarn\u201d the people (the literal meaning of the word translated \u201cenjoin\u201d) strictly about the commandments and the punishments for violating them, since he will no longer be judging them in person. But as far as deciding \u201cbetween one person and another\u201d (v. 16), you must associate other judges with you, for \u201cthe task is too heavy for you\u201d (v. 17). It will be better for both you and them if others bear this burden with you. It is well known that Moses already had officials serving as court officers (they are mentioned in Deut. 1:15), e.g., to bring to court those who were summoned; many of them were among the judges appointed here. But there was no need to mention them here, since this was not part of Jethro\u2019s advice.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe laws and the teachings. The \u201claws\u201d are those things which it is decreed that one must do, whether by commandment or by custom, and the \u201cteachings\u201d are the instructions about how to perform the commandments (Kimhi). These are the negative commandments, which cannot be known except by prophecy (Gersonides).
\nExodus 18:21
\nRASHI
\nYou shall also seek out. Literally, \u201cyou shall envision\u201d\u2014through the Holy Spirit that is upon you. Capable men. Rather, \u201crich\u201d men, who are under no pressure to flatter or show favoritism to anyone. Trustworthy men. Whose word is reliable, and who will therefore be listened to. Who spurn ill-gotten gain. Those who despise their own wealth if taken to court. As it says at B. BB 58b, \u201cA judge who must be hauled into court to pay money he owes to a plaintiff is no judge.\u201d Chiefs of thousands. Since there were 600,000 adult male Israelites, there were 600 of these. Hundreds. 6,000 of these. Fifties. 12,000 of these. Tens. 60,000 of these.
\nRASHBAM
\nCapable men. The Hebrew word implies that they are men of both wealth and might, who will fear no one. Who spurn ill-gotten gain. The word translated as \u201cill-gotten gain\u201d always refers to bribery or robbery; see Gen. 37:26 and Hab. 2:9.
\nIBN EZRA
\nI have already explained that Hebrew writers preserve meanings, not exact words; so we shall not contrast the differences between corresponding passages. Capable men. The reference is to their physical ability to stand up to the task; the word is used this way in Hab. 3:19, \u201cMy Lord god is my strength.\u201d Who fear God. So they will not acquire a bad reputation. Trustworthy men. Literally, \u201cmen of truth\u201d (OJPS), who do not lie. Who spurn ill-gotten gain. Money. The point is that they will not accept bribes. Chiefs of thousands, etc. Some make their total out to be 1,160; others, 678; still others, 11,110. I do not want to take the time to go over the calculations, for a careful reading of the text contradicts them. The truth is what the ancients said\u2014the grand total of chiefs was 78,600. For each chief of a thousand had under him 10 chiefs of hundreds; each chief of a hundred had under him two chiefs of fifties; each chief of a fifty had under him five chiefs of tens. But this number is absurd. As Prov. 28:2 says, \u201cWhen there is rebellion in the land, many are its rulers.\u201d Moreover, according to Deut. 1:15, these were all \u201cwise and experienced men,\u201d meaning that an eighth of the Israelite camp would have to be sages. This is extremely implausible in a group that Moses told, in the 40th year of their wandering, \u201cto this day the Lord has not given you a mind to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear\u201d (Deut. 29:3). I think the \u201cchiefs of thousands\u201d were those who had retinues of 1,000 men. There were probably 12 of these, one as head of each tribe. There would have been more of the chiefs of hundreds, fifties, and tens.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nCapable men. Literally, \u201cmen of force,\u201d capable of managing such a large force of people. The word is not used only of military forces. It is applied to the \u201cvast multitude\u201d of the revived dry bones in Ezek. 37:10 and the \u201carmy\u201d of locusts let loose in Joel 2:25. The word is also applied to multitudes of wealth (Deut. 8:17 and Isa. 30:6) and of fruit (Joel 2:22). In matters of justice, the \u201ccapable\u201d man is one who is wise, energetic, and honest, just as the capable warrior is energetic and knowledgeable about military formations and the capable wife (Prov. 12:4, 31:10) is energetic and knowledgeable about running a household. Jethro meant \u201ccapable\u201d as a general designation, which the subsequent phrases specify. Others understand it to mean \u201cenergetic, powerful men,\u201d an interpretation that is also supported by many biblical verses. Who fear God, trustworthy men who spurn ill-gotten gain. One cannot really be capable of establishing justice without these qualities. It was not necessary to add the qualities of wisdom mentioned when Moses recounts this episode in Deut. 1:13, since \u201ccapable\u201d automatically presupposes this. Who spurn ill-gotten gain. What Rashi means is that whatever of their own money that they realize someone could get from them by suing them, they despise it so much that they give it to him immediately without being sued\u2014even if they know that they are the rightful owners, as, for example, if one were to buy a slave without there being any witnesses, and the slave\u2019s former owner denies the transaction. But the Mekilta explains it differently. R. Joshua understands it to mean that they spurn bribes and R. Eleazar of Modi\u2019im that they spurn great wealth, an opinion also found in the Tanhuma. Onkelos\u2019 phrase, \u201cthose who hate to accept money,\u201d refers not to bribes, but to presents or loans that might influence their judgment. As B. Ket. 105b has it, \u201cA judge who is in the habit of borrowing is forbidden to pronounce judgment.\u201d But the straightforward explanation is that they despise the ill-gotten gain of others, and their only desire will be to get justice for one whose money was taken unjustly.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSeek out from among all the people. By means of prophecy (Gersonides). Capable men who fear God. Capable men tend to be grasping; hence only those who also feared God were suitable to serve as judges (Abarbanel). Who spurn ill-gotten gain. As our Sages said of Prov. 29:4, \u201cBy justice a king sustains the land, but one who exacts gifts overthrows it\u201d: If the judge is like a king, who needs nothing, he sustains the land; but if he is like a priest, always going back to the threshing floor for more, he overthrows it (Kimhi). Chiefs of thousands, etc. The same man who was chief of 1,000 might nonetheless also find himself within a group of 100 and under its chief, even under a chief of 10; and the same is true for all of them. This is the only system that accounts for the numbers given on B. Sanh. 18a (Bekhor Shor). To make Rashi\u2019s numbers work out, either these chiefs were all over 60, and hence not counted in the 600,000, or the chiefs were included in their own units; e.g., the chief of 100 was chief over 99 other men and himself (Hizkuni). That is, chiefs who serve in a council of 1,000 (one for each tribe); others who serve in a council of 100; and so forth. This is how it is done in Venice. A council of larger than 1,000 is too unwieldy (Abarbanel). The court system would have four different levels: 1,000s; 100s; 50s; and 10s (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:22\u201323
\nExodus 18:22
\nRASHI
\nMake it easier for yourself. Rather, \u201cmaking it easier for you.\u201d The verb form is not an imperative but a gerund.
\nRASHBAM
\nEvery major dispute. To inquire of God. See v. 15.
\nIBN EZRA
\nHave them bring every major dispute to you. And what you cannot decide, you will bring before God.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nLet them judge the people at all times. If there are many judges, the one who is robbed can find a judge who will be ready to help him at any hour, something that is impossible as long as you are doing all the judging. Many of them, having no opportunity to bring their case before you, simply put up with the injustice done to them, being unwilling to leave their jobs or businesses for as long as it would take to wait for an audience with you. Our Sages interpreted the phrase \u201cat all times\u201d to indicate that civil cases may be decided even at night, unlike criminal cases, which must be decided in the daytime.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nLet them judge the people at all times. Since they do not need to be ready to speak at any moment with the Shekhinah (as you do), nor do they have any other public responsibilities (Hizkuni). Make it easier for yourself. The translation is correct; the verb is an imperative (Bekhor Shor). The verb is a gerund: \u201cmaking it easier for yourself\u201d (Gersonides).
\nExodus 18:23
\nRASHI
\nGod so commands you\u2014you will be able to bear up. The verse should be read, Consult with the Almighty\u2014\u201cIf God commands you\u201d to do what you are already doing, \u201cyou will be able to bear up.\u201d But if He prevents you, you will not. All these people too. Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and the 70 elders who accompany you now.
\nRASHBAM
\nAnd God so commands you. Rather, \u201cwhen God commands you\u201d to judge them you will be able to bear up by means of your assistants. And all these people too, who \u201cstand about you from morning until evening\u201d (v. 14), will all quickly be able to go home unwearied.
\nIBN EZRA
\nGod so commands you. Rather, \u201cshould God so command you.\u201d He indicates that Moses should seek permission from God\u2014which he undoubtedly did. Home. To the land of Canaan. Others think \u201ctheir place\u201d (as the more literal OJPS has it) merely means \u201ctheir tents.\u201d In this case it would mean that with so many judges adjudicating cases, you would eliminate all quarrels and there would be peace among them. For you cannot judge them alone; there are just too many of them. There is no one to reprove them, and they go home to their tents without having made \u201cpeace\u201d (OJPS) with each other.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAll these people too will go home. Rather \u201cto their place\u201d (OJPS)\u2014to whatever place they go in their travels through the wilderness. Unwearied. Rather, \u201cin peace\u201d (OJPS). Currently, being unable to get to you to see justice done, no one can rest peacefully. For it provides an opportunity for robbers and swindlers.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGod so commands you. If you do this, your prophetic connection with God will not be severed, and God will \u201ccommand\u201d you, that is, give you the commandments of the Torah (Gersonides). Will go home unwearied. Since they will not have to come to you to be judged, but need only go to their neighbors (Hizkuni). Because their cases will be heard and decided immediately, and so strife and contention will be removed from among them (Gersonides). With four levels of courts to which to appeal, they can be confident that justice was done (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:24\u201319:1
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why did Moses (v. 25) choose only \u201ccapable\u201d men, and not the other qualifications that Jethro mentioned?
\nExodus 18:24
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses heeded his father-in-law. What Moses added to Jethro\u2019s plan\u2014\u201cofficials for your tribes\u201d (Deut. 1:15) to enforce the judges\u2019 decisions\u2014is not mentioned here.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses heeded his father-in-law and did just as he had said. This is an exaggeration, though Moses \u201cheeded\u201d him out of respect. The parallel text in Deuteronomy 1 reveals that Moses did a number of things differently. For instance, he waited until after the giving of the Torah (which he, but not Jethro, knew was imminent) to appoint the judges (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 18:25
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses chose capable men. For this quality was evident. But \u201cmen who fear God\u201d are not mentioned, since He alone knows the heart of man. Moses told the Israelites that he had chosen \u201cwise men\u201d (Deut. 1:15), for this is a quality that can be known (though there are wise men who do not fear God). Our text omits \u201cexperienced men\u201d (ibid.) for brevity\u2019s sake.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nCapable men. Including all the qualities mentioned in v. 21 as well as those of Deut. 1:13. Out of all Israel. The choicest of the Israelites, who possessed all the necessary qualities. Not being familiar enough with the people to know that the best of them possessed these qualities, Jethro had specified them.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses chose capable men. But the other qualities listed in v. 21 are not mentioned here, since they can only be estimated, not judged directly (Hizkuni). Not finding anyone with all the qualities listed by Jethro, Moses decided that capability was the most important quality (Sforno).
\nExodus 18:26
\nRASHBAM
\nThey would decide themselves. The verb form yishputu (instead of yishpotu) is somewhat unusual, but there are a number of places (e.g., Ruth 2:8) where u replaces o.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThey would decide themselves. There is a substitution of u for o in this unusual verb, as in Ruth 2:8; but one would expect no vowel at all, merely a sheva. It is probably a pausal form, the result of the word\u2019s being at the end of the verse. (For it is essentially compounded with the following pronoun.)
\nExodus 18:27
\nRASHI
\nHe went his way to his own land. To convert the rest of his family.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThen Moses bade his father-in-law farewell. Rather, he \u201csaw him off\u201d out of respect, just as Abraham walked with his visitors \u201cto see them off\u201d (Gen. 18:16).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses bade his father-in-law farewell. This did not take place until several years later; but when writing the Torah Moses summed up the whole story here, just as he had earlier done with the story of the manna (Abarbanel). He went his way to his own land. But Jethro\u2019s children undoubtedly went into the land with the Israelites, as is seen from Judg. 1:16 (Sforno).
\nExodus 19:1
\nRASHI
\nOn the third new moon. The Hebrew says merely \u201cin the third month\u201d (OJPS), but NJPS is correct\u2014it was the new moon. On that very day. It could have merely said \u201cOn that day.\u201d Why does it say \u201cOn that very day\u201d? To indicate that the words of the Torah should always be as new to you as on the day they were given.
\nIBN EZRA
\nOn that very day. We have no idea what \u201con that very day\u201d \u201cin the third month\u201d (OJPS) means, unless Moses Gikatilla\u2019s suggestion (followed by NJPS) is correct, that it means the day of the new moon. The text mentions this because the giving of the Torah took place only a few days afterward. Perhaps Moses went up to God on one day; came down and spoke with Israel on the next; and went back up to report Israel\u2019s answer to God on the third day\u2014at which time he was told the Torah would be given three days later. But this is all inference. We rely on the tradition that the Torah was given on the 6th of Sivan. If, as tradition has it, Nisan that year started on a Thursday, and Iyar (as usual) had only 29 days, then the Torah was given on a Friday. But it may say \u201con that very day\u201d because the distance from Rephidim to Mount Sinai was an unusually long journey.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nOn that very day. After the model of 16:1, this chapter ought to have begun, \u201cSetting out from Rephidim, they encamped in the wilderness of Sinai, on the third new moon after their departure from the land of Egypt.\u201d But their arrival in the wilderness of Sinai was a joyous festival for them, which they had been longing for ever since their departure from Egypt. For they knew that they would receive the Torah there, since Moses had told them that God said, \u201cyou shall worship God at this mountain\u201d (3:12). Moreover, he had told Pharaoh they would go \u201ca distance of three days into the wilderness to sacrifice to the Lord our God\u201d (5:3), and that was the distance to Mount Sinai. That is why this verse differs from the description of the other stages, to emphasize that they had finally arrived at the goal of their journey. Then v. 2 picks up the story as with the other stages of the journey.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nOn that very day. On the same day that they left Rephidim (Bekhor Shor). As R. Levi said, Israel in Egypt is comparable to a king\u2019s son who was ill. When he recovered, his tutor said, \u201cIt is time for him to go to school\u201d (Hizkuni). The wilderness of Sinai. This is the same as the wilderness of Sin; the extra yud at the end was added to represent, numerically, the Ten Commandments (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 19:2\u20133
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why was the Torah given only now, and not to Adam or Noah, Abraham or Jacob?
\n\u2666 Why was the Torah given in the wilderness rather than in Egypt, when God took the people for His service and began to give them commandments?
\n\u2666 Why didn\u2019t God give the Torah to the people on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem?
\n\u2666 Why all the repetition of the Israelites\u2019 travels in v. 2?
\n\u2666 Why does Moses go up to God before God calls him up the mountain (v. 3)?
\n\u2666 Why is the point of saying \u201cthe house of Jacob\u201d as well as \u201cthe children of Israel,\u201d and why is \u201cthe house of Jacob\u201d never mentioned again?
\nExodus 19:2
\nRASHI
\nHaving journeyed from Rephidim. We know they had been camped at Rephidim, so they must have journeyed from there\u2014why are we told this again? To liken their departure from Rephidim to their arrival in the wilderness of Sinai. Just as they arrived in Sinai in a state of repentance, so they departed from Rephidim\u2014in a state of repentance. Israel encamped there. The singular verb shows that they encamped here as one, with a single heart\u2014unlike their other encampments, where the plural verbs show that they were complaining and squabbling. In front of the mountain. East of it. \u201cIn front\u201d always indicates the east side.
\nRASHBAM
\nIn front of the mountain. \u201cThe\u201d mountain mentioned in 3:12, \u201cyou shall worship God at this mountain.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe wilderness. Of Sinai. Israel encamped there in front of the mountain. This second reference to encampment is that of the heads of the tribes, and the elders, who encamped \u201cin front of the mountain\u201d in a place of honor; this second use of the verb is in the singular because there were so few of them. For at the giving of the Torah the Israelites were placed around the mountain according to their status, as I shall explain in my comment to v. 22. Rashi says \u201cin front\u201d means on the east side, but in Num. 2:2 it clearly means \u201cfacing\u201d in every direction.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nHaving journeyed from Rephidim. I do not understand Rashi\u2019s comment. Saying that the Israelites encamped at a place and then journeyed from that place and encamped at another is the standard format for presenting their journeys. The text simply uses this format to show that there were no intermediate encampments between the two places. The point of the Mekilta, which is the source of Rashi\u2019s comment, is that the other journeys that are recounted here are repeated in Numbers 33 with some additional information, but this journey is presented the same way in both places. They were forced to attribute this repetition to the need to make the comparison mentioned by Rashi. They entered the wilderness of Sinai. This too differs from the expected model, \u201cthey encamped in the wilderness of Sinai.\u201d It implies that as soon as they entered the wilderness they encamped there, with the mountain opposite them, without waiting to see if they could find a better place to camp. They camped right there at Horeb\u2014\u201cutter ruin,\u201d as the name means\u2014in front of the mountain. Israel encamped. This may mean that they separated the riffraff from their midst, and only the Israelites camped in front of the mountain, with the mixed multitude behind them, for the Torah was to be given to specifically to Israel. Or saying that \u201cIsrael\u201d encamped (instead of \u201cthey\u201d or \u201cthe people\u201d) may simply be a mark of respect on the occasion upon which they were about to receive the Torah.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nIn front of the mountain. Rashi\u2019s explanation of this phrase does not say that they encamped \u201con the east,\u201d but \u201ctoward the east\u201d\u2014that is, in front of the mountain facing east. To camp on the east side they would have had to go past the mountain (Hizkuni). Since it was a long way from Rephidim to Sinai, they first camped \u201cin the wilderness,\u201d and then, after a while, the pillars of cloud and fire led them to camp in front of the mountain (Gersonides). Camping there on the plain, rather than on a high, protected position, showed their trust in God (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:3
\nRASHI
\nMoses went up. On the next day. Whenever he \u201cwent up\u201d to God, he did so early in the morning: \u201cEarly in the morning he went up on Mount Sinai\u201d (34:4). Thus. In these words, and in this order. Say to the house of Jacob. These are the women; speak gently to them. Declare to the children of Israel. These are the men; explain the punishments and the details to them\u2014\u201cdeclare\u201d (taged) to them things that are as bitter as wormwood (gidin).
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses went up to God. That is, he went up the mountain, not up to heaven; and only after the Lord called to him from the mountain. For he would not have gone up without permission. Saying. Literally, \u201cto say.\u201d He called him to come up the mountain in order for him \u201cto say\u201d the words of vv. 4\u20136 to Israel: Thus shall you say, etc. The House of Jacob \u2026 the children of Israel. Some take these two phrases to refer to the women and the men, respectively. But why would the women be mentioned first? Anyone who thinks the word \u201chouse\u201d refers to women cannot have read \u201cO house of Aaron, bless the Lord\u201d (Ps. 135:19), where \u201chouse\u201d refers to males, the priests. (See further my comment to 1:1.) Others take \u201cHouse of Jacob\u201d to refer to those present and \u201cchildren of Israel\u201d to those who would be born later. But what need is there for all this interpretation? It is as if they have never read any of the prophetic literature, where phrases are repeated rhetorically to lodge them in the heart. The ancients did the same in the liturgical poetry for Rosh Hashanah. In fact the reference is to the elders (see v. 7), who would tell the rest of the people (see v. 8).
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMoses went up to God. The cloud had covered the mountain since the day of their arrival, and God\u2019s Presence was there: \u201cThe Presence of the Lord abode on Mount Sinai, and the cloud hid it for six days\u201d (24:16) before the giving of the Torah. Moses \u201cwent up\u201d to the border of the mountain to be ready for God to summon him, but did not go into the fog where God was. The Lord called to him from the mountain. According to Ibn Ezra, God had called Moses to come up, making this phrase chronologically earlier than the previous one. But I disagree. What God \u201ccalled\u201d was Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and so forth. Ibn Ezra explains that God called him up the mountain to say this to him, but that is not correct. The correct understanding is that \u201cMoses went up to God\u201d\u2014the Presence, which was dwelling on the mountain in order to tell Israel the Ten Commandments\u2014but that \u201cthe Lord called to him from the mountain.\u201d For He would speak with Moses as His great Name, the Tetragrammaton. \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; he is trusted throughout My household. With him I speak mouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles, and he beholds the likeness of the Lord\u201d (Num. 12:6\u20138).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses went up to God. On the 2nd day of the month, which was a Tuesday (Hizkuni). As soon as they arrived, Moses went up the mountain, knowing that God would tell him there when and how the Torah was to be revealed. Or (since \u201cthe mountain\u201d is not mentioned) it could mean that Moses \u201cwent up\u201d intellectually\u2014his soul went up to God to receive the prophetic flow (Abarbanel). Seeing that the Israelites were busy with the camping and other practical needs, Moses prepared himself for prophecy (Sforno). The house of Jacob. Since the Torah was to be given to all, \u201cthe house of Jacob\u201d referred to the sneakier ones and \u201cthe children of Israel\u201d to the more honest. Or perhaps \u201cthe house of Jacob\u201d was the mass of Israelites and \u201cthe children of Israel\u201d the special individuals among them (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:4\u20135
\nExodus 19:4
\nRASHI
\nYou have seen. It is not a tradition that you have; I am not sending a message to you; I am not bringing witnesses to testify before you; you have seen it yourselves. What I did to the Egyptians. They owed Me for many transgressions before they tangled with you, but I did not punish them except on your account. I bore you. This refers to the day that Israel came to Rameses from their homes all over the land of Goshen. In no time at all, when the moment came to leave, they were all gathered at Rameses. But Onkelos translates it \u201cI took you\u201d (as if it were from \u05e0\u05e1\u05e2 rather than \u05e0\u05e9\u05d0), out of respect for God. On eagles\u2019 wings. Other birds carry their young beneath them, in their claws, being afraid of a bird of prey swooping down on them from above. But an eagle is afraid of nothing except people shooting arrows from below, for no bird of prey attacks it. So it carries its young on its wings. Just as the eagle thinks, \u201cBetter that the arrow pierce me than my children,\u201d so did God: \u201cThe pillar of cloud \u2026 came between the army of the Egyptians and the army of Israel\u201d (14:19\u201320). The Egyptians shot arrows and catapulted stones at the Israelites, and the cloud absorbed them. And brought you to Me. As Onkelos renders it, \u201cAnd brought you close to My service.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nOn eagles\u2019 wings. For I brought you across the sea on dry land, just as eagles cross the sea by flight, and kept you unharmed, \u201clike an eagle who \u2026 hovers over his young\u201d (Deut. 32:11). And brought you to Me. So I could be your God.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou have seen what I did to the Egyptians. The revenge I took upon them, on your behalf. I bore you on eagles\u2019 wings. As if on eagles\u2019 wings; \u201clike an eagle who rouses his nestlings \u2026 so did He spread His wings [the cloud] and take them\u201d (Deut. 32:11). For the eagle flies higher than any other bird. All fear it, but it fears none. And brought you to Me. To Mount Sinai, the \u201choly abode\u201d of 15:13, so called because of the descent of the Shekhinah onto Mount Sinai.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nBrought you to Me. To the place of My Presence, this mountain, where My Shekhinah is with you.\u2014Onkelos, who translated, \u201cand brought you close to My service,\u201d chose the path of respect for the divine.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nHow I bore you on eagles\u2019 wings. That is, I raised your status tremendously, from being the slaves of slaves to being My slaves. For eagles fly high above all other birds (Bekhor Shor). Rashi says this refers to the day that Israel came to Rameses from their homes all over the land of Goshen; but in his comment to 12:37 he says it refers to their journey from Rameses to Succoth. In fact, it applies just as well to both (Hizkuni). Eagles fly fast (Gersonides). To go where no man had gone before (Sforno).
\nExodus 19:5
\nRASHI
\nNow. If only you will accept the obligation of the covenant now, you will find it sweet from now on\u2014for all beginnings are difficult. Keep my covenant. That I will make with you, to observe the Torah. My treasured possession. As the word is used in Eccles. 2:8, \u201ctreasures of kings,\u201d referring to the expensive utensils and precious stones that kings store away. You will be like that to Me, more treasured than all the other nations. But don\u2019t think that you alone are Mine and that I have no love for others with which My special love for you can be compared. For Indeed, all the earth is Mine. But they are as nothing in My sight.
\nRASHBAM
\nIndeed, all the earth is Mine. And all the peoples are Mine; but I have chosen only you alone.
\nIBN EZRA
\nKeep My covenant. That I will make with you at this mountain. In my opinion, it refers to \u201cthe record of the covenant\u201d (24:7), and the events related in that passage took place after the events of ch. 19. My treasured possession. The word refers to something unique and highly esteemed, as in Eccles. 2:8, \u201ctreasures of kings.\u201d Indeed, all the earth is Mine. OJPS is the better translation; this phrase goes with \u201call the peoples,\u201d not with the following verse. Ibn Janah takes it as does NJPS, but there is no need for this.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nKeep My covenant. The covenant I made with your ancestors, to be their God and the God of their offspring after them. Ibn Ezra thinks it refers to the covenant that will be made in 24:8. But the True interpretation is, \u201cYou must keep My covenant and cleave to Me, for if you obey Me and do all that I say, you shall be My treasured possession among all the peoples.\u201d A king does not put his treasured possession in the hand of another. Indeed, all the earth is Mine. \u201cThe sun and the moon and the stars \u2026 the Lord your God allotted to other peoples everywhere under heaven; but you the Lord took\u201d (Deut. 4:19\u201320). \u201cI have set you apart from other peoples to be Mine\u201d (Lev. 20:26). Alternatively, as I said, the \u201ctreasured possession\u201d may refer to their \u201ccleaving\u201d to God. In which case the rest of the verse means, \u201cFor the earth called \u2018All\u2019 is Mine.\u201d See my comment to Gen. 24:1, \u201cThe Lord had blessed Abraham in all things.\u201d One who is enlightened will understand. \u201cYou shall be\u201d in unity with Me, unlike the rest of the nations. The Mekilta, interpreting the literal phrase \u201cyou shall be to Me,\u201d says the same thing: \u201cI do not, as it were, set up anyone to rule over you but Myself. \u2018The guardian of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps!\u2019 [Ps. 121:4].\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nYou shall be My treasured possession among all the peoples. Though the whole human race is precious to Me by comparison with the lower beings, you shall be the most precious of all (Sforno). Indeed, all the earth is Mine. And the difference between you and other nations is a matter of degree. For the righteous of the other nations are precious to Me, without a doubt (Sforno).
\nExodus 19:6\u20138
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why, when Moses speaks to \u201cthe elders\u201d (v. 7), is he answered by \u201cthe people\u201d (v. 8)?
\n\u2666 Why do the people agree to do \u201call that the Lord has spoken\u201d (v. 8) when He has not yet spoken it?
\nExodus 19:6
\nRASHI
\nYou shall be to Me a kingdom of priests. Rather, \u201cprinces,\u201d as it also means in 2 Sam. 8:18 in reference to David\u2019s sons. These are the words. No more and no less.
\nRASHBAM
\nPriests. Rather, \u201cprinces,\u201d as in 2 Sam. 8:18.
\nIBN EZRA
\nA kingdom of priests. In my opinion, \u201cpriest\u201d in the Bible means \u201cone who serves,\u201d just as the verbal form is taken in 28:41 to mean \u201cserve Me as priests.\u201d Jethro is the \u201cpriest of Midian\u201d (18:1) because he served God, as did Melchizedek of Salem, the \u201cpriest of God Most High\u201d (Gen. 14:18). The same is true when David\u2019s sons are called \u201cpriests\u201d in 2 Sam. 8:18. There would be no point in telling us that they were \u201cprinces,\u201d for we know that a king\u2019s sons possess high rank; this verse informs us that they served God. So telling Israel they will be \u201ca kingdom of priests\u201d means, \u201cBy means of you, My kingship shall appear, when you are serving Me.\u201d But others understand it to mean: \u201cThere is no kingship other than serving Me.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA kingdom of priests. A kingdom of those who serve Me. A holy nation. To cleave to the holy God. \u201cYou shall be holy, for I, the Lord your God, am holy\u201d (Lev. 19:2). In this way, He offered them a promise both in this world and in the World To Come.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nA kingdom of priests. Lest you think that I am giving you the Torah to burden and belittle you, be aware that I am making you a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Gersonides). Their serving God as priests would elevate them to royal rank (Abarbanel). To teach the whole human race and bring them to serve Me (Sforno). These are the words that you shall speak to the children of Israel. For these words will certainly convince them to accept the Torah (Gersonides).
\nExodus 19:7
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses came. To the Israelite camp. There was no need to add that he came down from the mountain. Put before them. In speech; others think it means in writing. Saadia, comparing it to \u201cput it in their mouths\u201d (Deut. 31:19), thinks it refers to the Oral Torah, which explains the Written Torah.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nPut before them all that the Lord had commanded him. He told them, \u201cI have put all these things before you; choose, today, whether you will do them.\u201d That is why they answered, All that the Lord has spoken we will do! The implication of 21:1, \u201cThese are the rules that you shall set before them,\u201d is similar: Let them say whether they choose to accept upon themselves the obligation to perform them (as indeed they do in 24:3). In Deut. 4:44, \u201cThis is the Teaching that Moses set before the Israelites,\u201d he gives the same choice to the generation that will enter the land, to make a covenant like that which their ancestors had made at Horeb. See also Deut. 30:15. Saadia understands \u201cput before them\u201d to mean \u201cteach them,\u201d as when God tells Moses about the poem of Deuteronomy 32 to \u201cput it in their mouths.\u201d But this is not right; it is, as I have explained, putting a choice before them. Moreover, this explains All the people answered as one. Moses called the elders of the people, who were their sages and their officials\u2014for the choice was theirs\u2014and put these things before them in front of the whole assembly. For he was commanded to present them to \u201cthe house of Jacob and \u2026 the children of Israel\u201d (v. 3). And they did not wait for the elders to discuss them and choose, but instead \u201cAll the people\u201d from great to small \u201canswered as one, \u2018All that the Lord has spoken we will do!\u2019 \u201d They did the same in 24:3.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe elders. For God\u2019s intent in v. 3 was to have Moses explain what He said to those who would understand, and for them to explain to the people as a whole (Gersonides).
\nExodus 19:8
\nRASHI
\nMoses brought back the people\u2019s words to the Lord. On the next day, the 3rd of the month\u2014for he went up early in the morning. Did Moses really have to bring their words to God? No; the text teaches good manners by Moses\u2019 example. For he did not think, \u201cSince the One who sent me already knows, I have no need to bring Him an answer.\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nMoses brought back the people\u2019s words to the Lord. This is reported in v. 9. Our verse is the general statement; afterward, the details of the conversation are given: The Holy One told Moses, \u201cI will come to you in a thick cloud\u201d and so forth, after which Moses told the Holy One, \u201cThe people already agreed yesterday to do what You command them.\u201d There are comparable examples in Lev. 9:24\u201310:2 and Judg. 17:3\u20134.
\nIBN EZRA
\nAs one. OJPS \u201ctogether\u201d is more literal; but NJPS has the sense. The form is unique; there is no other word in the Bible with this adverbial vav at the end. To the Lord. Again, there was no need to mention specifically that he went up the mountain.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMoses brought back the people\u2019s words to the Lord. He returned before Him, to the mountain, with the people\u2019s answer. Of course, all was revealed to Him\u2014as we know from Deut. 5:25, \u201cThe Lord heard the plea that you made to me, and the Lord said to me, \u2018I have heard the plea that this people made to you; they did well to speak thus\u2019 \u201d\u2014and He did not ask, \u201cWhat did the people answer you?\u201d When Moses came before Him, the Blessed Lord said to him, \u201cI will come to you in a thick cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after\u201d (v. 9). Only then did Moses have a chance to actually \u201creport\u201d the people\u2019s words (which previously he had merely \u201cbrought back\u201d) to the Lord. He said, \u201cLord of the Universe! Your children believe, and they accept the obligation to do whatever You say.\u201d Ibn Ezra\u2019s explanation, that v. 9 means that Moses had reported the people\u2019s words, is unnecessary.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nAll that the Lord has spoken we will do! We agree to do what He spoke in v. 5\u2014to obey Him and keep his covenant (Abarbanel). Moses brought back the people\u2019s words. On Wednesday the 3rd. Vv. 24:1\u20132 took place on Thursday the 4th, and Moses then gave the people the laws of chs. 21\u201323, which had been given at Marah, immediately after which v. 9 in our chapter resumes the action (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 19:9\u201310
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does God have to appear \u201cin a thick cloud\u201d (v. 9) so that the people may hear?
\n\u2666 Why does Moses \u201creport the people\u2019s words\u201d to God in v. 9, when he has already \u201cbrought back the people\u2019s words\u201d in v. 8?
\n\u2666 Why does \u201cGo to the people and warn them to stay pure\u201d (v. 10) not follow \u201cI will come to you in a thick cloud\u201d (v. 9) without interruption, since that is where it belongs?
\nExodus 19:9
\nRASHI
\nIn a thick cloud. Literally, \u201cthick\u201d is simply another word for cloud; but the translations understand it correctly. It implies \u201cfog.\u201d And so trust you ever after. With OJPS, add \u201calso,\u201d which implies: also the prophets who will come after you. Moses reported the people\u2019s words to the Lord. On the next day, the 4th of the month. He reported, I have already heard their answer to this\u2014they want to hear it from You. For to hear it from the messenger is not the same as to hear it from the king. \u201cWe want to see our king!\u201d
\nRASHBAM
\nA thick cloud. Cloud and darkness, so the Shekhinah could not be seen.
\nIBN EZRA
\nA thick cloud. According to Saadia, this phrase, more literally \u201ca cloud of the cloud,\u201d is comparable to the phrase \u201cthe Holy of Holies,\u201d that is, \u201cmost sacred\u201d (as that phrase is translated in Num. 4:4). It is the ultimate cloud. That the people may hear when I speak with you. The commentators explain this as a reference to their conversations in this chapter, as described in v. 19. But in my opinion, it alludes to God\u2019s speaking the words of the covenant at Mount Sinai\u2014that is, the Ten Commandments. After all, the people said to Moses, \u201cYou speak to us and we will obey; but let not God speak to us, lest we die\u201d (20:16), showing that at first they did hear God speaking to Moses. Trust you ever after. Rather, \u201cbelieve thee for ever\u201d (OJPS)\u2014believe that you are a prophet. Many of the Israelites were of the same opinion as the sages of India, who argue that one who is embodied cannot speak with one who is not a body and live. They had acquired this belief in Egypt, which shared many ideas with India (both being Hamites) right up until the Muslim conquest (e.g., vegetarianism). Hence they had some doubts about Moses\u2019 ability to prophesy. Now they had to admit, \u201cWe have seen this day that man may live though God has spoken to him\u201d (Deut. 5:21). Then Moses reported the people\u2019s words to the Lord. Not \u201cthen Moses reported\u201d but \u201cfor Moses had reported.\u201d \u201cReporting\u201d always involves communicating new information, so this cannot be a reference to \u201cthe people\u2019s words\u201d (v. 8). From God\u2019s response in v. 9, we learn what Moses reported to him\u2014that some of the people doubted that Moses was a prophet. Hence God\u2019s promise to come to him \u201cin a thick cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nA thick cloud. The fog where God was. Everyone could see that this was so, as 24:17 explains, \u201cNow the Presence of the Lord appeared in the sight of the Israelites as a consuming fire on the top of the mountain.\u201d In order that the people may hear when I speak with you. Ibn Ezra\u2019s comment cannot be correct, for the offspring of Abraham could not be in doubt about prophecy, which they had believed in since their ancestors\u2019 time. It is true that 4:31 and 14:31 refer only to \u201cthe people,\u201d not \u201call the people,\u201d but this verse too does not say \u201cthat all the people may hear.\u201d In my opinion, what God is saying is, \u201cYou come into the thick cloud so that the people can hear, and they themselves will be prophets of My word and not have to believe what others tell them.\u201d As Deut. 4:10 puts it, God said, \u201cGather the people to Me that I may let them hear My words, in order that they may learn to revere Me as long as they live on earth.\u201d And so trust you ever after. Forever, through all generations. If a prophet or dreamer of dreams should arise among them to contradict your word, they will reject him immediately, for they saw with their own eyes and heard with their own ears that you reached the highest degree of prophecy. See again Num. 12:6\u20138. Deut. 5:21, \u201cWe have seen this day that man may live though God has spoken to him,\u201d confirms that what God wanted to happen did in fact occur\u2014they saw it with their own eyes. Their request in 5:24 that Moses transmit God\u2019s word to them shows that they accepted that he was the greatest of the prophets. The Mekilta\u2019s interpretation of the literal \u201calso believe you\u201d (compare OJPS) to mean that they would believe both in Moses and also in future prophets inclines toward Ibn Ezra\u2019s opinion.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nIn order that the people may hear when I speak with you. The people had said, \u201cAll that the Lord has spoken, we will do!\u201d (v. 8)\u2014they wanted a sign that what Moses told them was indeed what the Lord had spoken (Gersonides). And so trust you ever after. Having heard My voice speak with you, they will not doubt your prophecy (Abarbanel). Once I have spoken with them \u201cface to face\u201d (Deut. 5:4), they will understand that I can do the same with you.\u2014Since up to this point prophecy had been by means of visions and dreams, the people were not convinced that Moses could prophesy while in possession of his senses (Sforno). Moses reported the people\u2019s words to the Lord. As recorded in 24:3: \u201cAll the things that the Lord has commanded we will do!\u201d (Hizkuni). Having thought over God\u2019s reply, Moses realized that the people wanted God, not Moses, to speak to them; so he reported this to God (Gersonides). Having realized, after what God said, that the people had promised only to do what God Himself had spoken (Sforno).
\nExodus 19:10
\nRASHI
\nWarn them to stay pure. Rather, \u201csanctify them\u201d (OJPS), implying that Moses was to \u201csummon them\u201d to prepare themselves today and tomorrow.
\nRASHBAM
\nWarn them to stay pure. Rather, \u201cSummon them.\u201d It has the same meaning in Num. 11:18.
\nIBN EZRA
\nTo stay pure. Literally, to \u201csanctify\u201d themselves (OJPS)\u2014by washing with water\u2014and then stay away from everything that is impure or makes one impure. In this case \u201csanctification\u201d involves avoidance of women, as we see from \u201cdo not go near a woman\u201d (v. 15). From 2 Sam. 11:4, \u201cShe had just purified herself after her period,\u201d we know that such purification requires washing with water, as Bathsheba had just done. With regard to night emissions, see my comment to Deut. 23:10. Today and tomorrow. The rest of today, and tomorrow.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nWarn them to stay pure. Rashi and Onkelos understand the verb translated here as \u201cwarn them\u201d to mean \u201csummon them,\u201d as it seems to mean in Isa. 13:3. Ibn Ezra takes it to mean that they must wash. But why would they have to wash \u201ctoday and tomorrow\u201d? There would be no need to wash more than once. Rather, it means that they must be \u201csanctified\u201d (OJPS), holy, and not go near a woman or near anything impure. For one who keeps away from impurity is called sanctified: \u201cSpeak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them: None shall defile himself \u2026 They shall be holy to their God\u201d (Lev. 21:1,6), a condition that in 2 Chron. 30:3 is called \u201csanctified.\u201d Similarly, when David comes to the priest Ahimelech seeking food for his men, \u201cThe priest answered David, \u2018I have no ordinary bread on hand; there is only consecrated bread\u2014provided the young men have kept away from women\u2019 \u201d (1 Sam. 21:5). Obviously such \u201csanctification\u201d also involved washing, as we learn from the further instruction, Let them wash their clothes. As the Mekilta reminds us, the washing of garments always presupposes immersion of the body as well.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWarn them to stay pure. For face-to-face prophecy, not only the soul but the body also must be clean (Sforno). Let them wash clothes. So that they come before Me in purity and cleanliness (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 19:11\u201313
\nExodus 19:11
\nRASHI
\nLet them be ready. Separated from women. The third day. The 6th of the month. On the 5th, Moses built the altar at the foot of the mountain and the 12 pillars\u2014all the things mentioned in 24:4\u20138. For the Torah is not written in chronological order. In the sight of all the people. This teaches that not one of them was blind; all the blind were healed.
\nRASHBAM
\nThe Lord will come down, in the sight of all the people. \u201cThe Lord said\u201d of v. 10 must refer to an angel and not to the Holy One Himself. Otherwise it would say here \u201cI will come down.\u201d I explained Gen. 19:24 similarly, as does the midrash\u2014the first \u201cLord\u201d in that verse refers to Gabriel, the second to the Holy One.
\nIBN EZRA
\nLet them be ready. Perhaps this means that none of them should sleep on the night before the morning when they were to hear the word of God\u2014like the High Priest on the Day of Atonement.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord will come down, in the sight of all the people. They will all see Him coming down, in the form of \u201ca consuming fire on the top of the mountain\u201d (24:17). Not that they will actually see God, for \u201cman may not see Me and live\u201d (33:20).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe third day. Saturday the 6th, the day of the giving of the Torah (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 19:12
\nRASHI
\nYou shall set bounds. As a sign that they should not get closer than that to the mountain. Saying. The boundary should say to them, \u201cBeware of going higher up the mountain than this!\u201d And as for you\u2014warn them about it! Touching the border of it. Even the border of it.
\nRASHBAM
\nYou shall set bounds. To show them how close they may come.
\nIBN EZRA
\nYou shall set bounds for the people. Set a boundary on the mountain around the people. Even though it literally says \u201cSet bounds on the people,\u201d the boundary is on the mountain. The phrase Moses uses in v. 23, \u201cset bounds on the mountain,\u201d means exactly the same thing. I am only explaining this at such length because of the crazy man, full of hot air, who turned the living words of God upside down in his book, saying that Moses meant to say \u201cthe people\u201d in v. 23 but said \u201cthe mountain\u201d instead. Whoever touches the mountain. With any part of his body.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nShall be put to death. By court order; by stoning, as is made clear in v. 13 (Gersonides). This prohibition lasted from the Feast of Weeks, when the Torah was given, to the Day of Atonement (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:13
\nRASHI
\nHe shall be either stoned or shot. The word means not \u201cshot\u201d but \u201cthrown down,\u201d as it does in 15:4. Hence we learn that those who are stoned to death are thrown down from the place of stoning, which was two stories high. When the ram\u2019s horn sounds a long blast. As a sign that the Shekhinah has departed and the Voice has ceased. Once I am gone, they are permitted to go up the mountain.\u2014Literally the phrase is \u201cat the pull of the ram.\u201d The unusual word for \u201cram\u201d is the one used in Arabia. The horn used in this case was from the ram that was substituted for Isaac in Gen. 22:13.
\nRASHBAM
\nNo hand shall touch him. They shall put him to death from a distance; they shall not approach the mountain and themselves earn death. That is why \u201cno hand shall touch him,\u201d but he must be shot by arrows, from a distance, or they must stone him to death. When the ram\u2019s horn sounds a long blast. When the Shekhinah departs, and \u201cthe thunder and lightning and the blare of the horn\u201d (20:15) cease. The \u201cpull of the horn\u201d (as the Hebrew literally says) refers not to sounding it, but to its ceasing to sound.
\nIBN EZRA
\nNo hand shall touch him. It should not be read (as the Hebrew might be interpreted) \u201cNo hand shall touch it,\u201d the mountain. No one should think: \u201cSince he has touched the mountain anyway, I can go retrieve him in order to kill him.\u201d He must be stoned from nearby. But if he flees up the mountain, the archers should shoot him. Beast or man. But not birds, which could simply fly away. The ram\u2019s horn. The shofar. Literally, \u201cthe jubilee\u201d\u2014for the ram\u2019s horn is blown to mark the jubilee year. But the word is traditionally understood to mean \u201cram.\u201d A long blast. Literally, \u201ca pull.\u201d The sound is extended like the tekiah note of a shofar. It is surprising that some think this refers to \u201cthe blare of the horn\u201d in v. 19. That \u201cblare of the horn\u201d is the greatest of all the miracles at Sinai. Thunder and lightning, clouds and hail had all appeared in the world before, but not this \u201cblare\u201d\u2014which was not produced from a ram\u2019s horn. They may go up on the mountain. Aaron and his sons, and the 70 elders (24:1). \u201cThey\u201d may go, but no others. This follows the opinion of Samuel b. Hophni; Saadia thinks it refers to the \u201call clear\u201d after Moses came down the mountain on the Day of Atonement and commanded the building of the Tabernacle. But I like Samuel b. Hophni\u2019s explanation, for the Presence remained continuously on Mount Sinai until it \u201cfilled the Tabernacle\u201d (40:34), at which point it was gone from the mountain. Perhaps it was then that Moses blew \u201ca long blast.\u201d
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe ram\u2019s horn. I do not understand Rashi\u2019s comment. The ram substituted for Isaac was sacrificed as a burnt offering, in which the horns and hooves are burnt as well. Perhaps the Holy One kneaded the ashes of the horn and restored it to what it had once been. But in my opinion there is a deeper meaning to this legend. What they meant was that the \u201cvoice of a horn\u201d (OJPS) mentioned in v. 16 was the aspect of God known as \u201cthe Fear of Isaac\u201d (Gen. 31:42). That is why \u201call the people who were in the camp trembled.\u201d They did not apprehend an utterance from this Power, \u201conly a voice\u201d (Deut. 4:12).
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nNo hand shall touch him. Rather, \u201cno hand shall touch it\u201d\u2014the mountain (Gersonides). Beast or man. Birds, against whom it would be impossible to enforce this (since they could fly away), are not mentioned (Hizkuni). The ram\u2019s horn. According to Saadia, this is not \u201cthe horn\u201d of vv. 16 and 19, where a different Hebrew word is used, but the ram\u2019s horn that Moses blew to signal the completion of the Tabernacle (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 19:14\u201316
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why was the Torah given with \u201cthunder and lightning\u201d (v. 16) and not in the \u201cstill small voice\u201d that Elijah heard in 1 Kings 19:12?
\n\u2666 How could these special effects help the people hear the word of the Lord?
\nExodus 19:14
\nRASHI
\nFrom the mountain to the people. This teaches that Moses went directly from the mountain to the people without turning to his own affairs.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nMoses came down from the mountain to the people. This tells us that God\u2019s speech to Moses in vv. 10\u201313 also took place on the mountain. For Moses would go up there every time to speak with Him. The Mekilta expounds the verse as follows: \u201cIt teaches that Moses did not turn to his own business, or even to his home, but went directly from the mountain to the people.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nWarned the people to stay pure. Three days were not necessary; it would have been enough for them to bathe that evening. But since they were a mixed \u201cmultitude,\u201d he gave them a multitude of time (Hizkuni).
\nExodus 19:15
\nRASHI
\nBe ready for the third day. For three full days, that is, the beginning of the fourth. For Moses added on his own an additional day to what God had commanded, as R. Jose says at B. Shab. 87a. But according to those who say that the Ten Commandments were given on the 6th of the month, Moses did not add anything, and it means \u201cby the third day.\u201d Do not go near a woman. The whole three days\u2014so that the women could immerse themselves by the third day and be purified to receive the Torah. For if they had sex during the three days, the woman might emit the man\u2019s semen after immersing herself and return to a state of impurity. But having waited three days, any semen that remained would already have spoiled and be no longer viable; this prevents it from rendering a woman who discharges it impure.
\nIBN EZRA
\nBe ready for the third day. As is clearly proven by the usage of the phrase in Gen. 40:19\u201320 and 42:17\u201318, NJPS translates correctly; Moses did not add a day to what God told him.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe third day. The rabbinic comment that Moses on his own added an extra day to what God had asked was made for midrashic purposes. God had fixed the giving of the Torah for the Feast of Weeks, the 50th day after the first day of Passover, and Moses would certainly not have changed this to a different day (Gersonides). Do not go near a woman. To say nothing of serious impurity (Bekhor Shor).
\nExodus 19:16
\nRASHI
\nAs morning dawned. This teaches that God arrived early for Israel\u2019s sake. It is not the way of human society for the master to wait for the disciple, but it is God\u2019s way: \u201cThen the hand of the Lord came upon me there, and He said to me, \u2018Arise, go out to the valley, and there I will speak with you.\u2019 I arose and went out to the valley, and there stood the Presence of the Lord\u201d (Ezek. 3:22\u201323).
\nIBN EZRA
\nOn the third day, as morning dawned. This is the clue that the word \u201cday\u201d includes both daytime and nighttime. I will explain this further in my comment to 35:3. In my opinion the literal phrase \u201cat the becoming of morning\u201d refers to a time close to sunrise. Thunder. Literally, \u201cvoices\u201d; but the translations are correct. A dense cloud upon the mountain. And only on the mountain; so too the thunder and lightning. A very loud blast of the horn. Again the word \u201cvoice\u201d is used\u2014but this sound was a miraculous, not a natural, one. The blast was louder than any that had ever been heard. Trembled. On account of the blast of the horn.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nOn the third day. It was Saturday the 6th of Sivan. I have been explaining the dates according to the system of the Sages. But according to R. Jose, Moses added an extra day to the amount of time that God commanded the people to be pure, and the Saturday on which the Torah was given was the 7th of Sivan (Hizkuni). Thunder and lightning, etc. All of these phenomena\u2014involving the four basic elements of air, earth, fire, and water\u2014were natural ones; their miraculous nature lay in their being created for the occasion rather than caused in the ordinary way (Abarbanel). A very loud blast of the horn. God created this sound miraculously, just as He had created the thunder, the lightning, and the cloud. What I mean to say is that God created the blast of a horn without there being any horn (Gersonides). All the people who were in the camp trembled. Not at the thunder and lightning, which they had seen before, but at the sound of a horn when there was no horn to make the sound (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:17\u201319
\nExodus 19:17
\nRASHI
\nToward God. This tells us that the Shekhinah came forth to meet them as a bridegroom comes forth to meet the bride. This is why Deut. 33:2 says not \u201cThe Lord came to Sinai\u201d but \u201cThe Lord came from Sinai.\u201d At the foot of the mountain. This is the straightforward sense. But the midrash takes \u201cat the nether part of the mount\u201d (OJPS) to mean that the mountain was plucked from its place and upended over them like a tub. God said, \u201cIf Israel will accept the Torah, fine. If not, I am returning the world to unformed chaos.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nToward God. How could an immaterial God create the physical phenomenon of a voice? Some say that God\u2019s word preexisted the world. The sages of the gaonic period say that God created a voice for this situation. (But he would have had to create something physical to produce the voice.) They also say that God sometimes creates light or rain for a prophet. Others say that since God\u2019s speech was miraculous, we cannot understand how it operated, as when He said \u201cRemember\u201d (20:8) and \u201cObserve\u201d (Deut. 5:12) simultaneously. We could certainly say this were it not for the fact that the listeners were human beings, who heard the voice with their ordinary senses. Now the sense of hearing is not like the sense of sight. For the eye can receive many impressions simultaneously, but the ear cannot. Since sound is a vibration in the air, it reaches the ear in sequence, the first sound first and the last sound last. If one wishes to assert that God miraculously altered their sense of hearing so that they could hear both words simultaneously, why is this miracle not described explicitly in the text? I will make the following general statement: Anyone who explains the text by means of a miracle that is not written explicitly in the text and not part of tradition is giving an explanation that is not true. Even if we find such things in the Talmud, if they are the words of a single individual, we should neither accept them nor deny them. You will know my own opinion from my comment to Deut. 4:35. For there I will explain why the text said \u201ctoward God,\u201d as well as \u201cGod has come\u201d (20:17). At the foot of the mountain. Outside the boundary.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nMoses led the people out of the camp. For they were too frightened to go (Bekhor Shor). Toward God. Toward the heavenly retinue\u2014for \u201cThe Lord came down upon Mount Sinai\u201d only in v. 20 (Sforno).
\nExodus 19:18
\nRASHI
\nAll in smoke. Better, \u201call a-smoke\u201d or \u201call smoking.\u201d It is a verb, as Onkelos translates, not a noun. A kiln. Literally, \u201ca furnace\u201d (OJPS), like those in which lime is burnt. But it was hotter than a kiln, \u201cablaze with flames to the very skies\u201d (Deut. 4:11). \u201cKiln\u201d or \u201cfurnace\u201d was simply to give people an image they could comprehend, like comparing God\u2019s voice to a lion\u2019s roar (Hosea 11:10) or \u201cthe roar of mighty waters\u201d (Ezek. 43:2). It is God who gives the lions and the waters their roar, of course. But we use these images to picture God in terms we can understand.
\nRASHBAM
\nAll in smoke. This is really a verb, not a noun. The smoke of a kiln. But this is a gerund, \u201cthe smoking of a kiln.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe smoke of a kiln. This is indeed the ordinary word \u201csmoke\u201d; it is one of the nouns that are declined in more than one way. The whole mountain trembled violently. \u201cThe mountains may move\u201d (Isa. 54:10) is rhetorical; what happened here is the exact opposite of the ordinary. For mountains do not move.
\nExodus 19:19
\nRASHI
\nThe blare of the horn grew louder and louder. Ordinarily, the longer one blows the weaker the blare gets. But here it started soft and got louder. Why was it soft at first? To break in the ear with something it was capable of hearing. As Moses spoke. Moses would speak and make the commandments comprehensible to the Israelites. For all they heard directly from the Almighty was the first two commandments, 20:2\u20136. The Holy One gave Moses the strength to make his voice loudly audible. Answered him in thunder. Rather, \u201canswered him by a voice\u201d (OJPS). God responded to Moses by making Moses\u2019 voice loudly audible.
\nRASHBAM
\nAs Moses spoke. To the Holy One. His voice was not audible to any of the people, only to the Holy One. But the Holy One answered Moses not in thunder but \u201cby a [loud] voice\u201d (OJPS), because \u201cthe blare of the horn grew louder and louder.\u201d The Holy One had to overpower the sound of the horn for Moses to hear His voice.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe blare of the horn grew louder and louder. Ordinarily a horn starts loud, but here it was the opposite\u2014perhaps because God did not want to frighten them. As Moses spoke. Saadia thinks God would interrupt the blare of the horn so that Moses could speak. But, as I have explained in my comment to v. 9, what God wanted the people to hear was the Ten Commandments. In the conversation reported in this verse, despite the fact that the blare of the horn made everyone shake with fear, and even the mountain was shaking as the ground does during an earthquake, while all this was happening, Moses would speak and God would \u201canswer him in thunder.\u201d For only Moses could hear Him\u2014he was so connected with God that the blare of the horn did not prevent him from hearing, even though he was at the foot of the mountain. But the text does not tell us what Moses asked God.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nAs Moses spoke, God answered him in thunder. \u201cBy a voice\u201d (OJPS). According to the Mekilta, this refers to the giving of the Torah; Moses would speak the commandments to Israel, as Rashi wrote. But according to the straightforward sense, the text is not yet speaking about this. God came down to the mountain on the third day, Moses brought the people out from the camp toward the Presence that appeared to them, and \u201cthey took their places at the foot of the mountain\u201d (v. 17). Moses went up near the top of the mountain, where the Presence was, in a separate area of his own, and spoke with Israel to teach them what they must do. They heard the voice of God answering Moses, and commanding him, but they did not understand what it was saying to him. This is the conversation reported in vv. 21\u201324. All this was before the giving of the Torah, but the same applies to the Ten Commandments. For Moses did not go up to the top of the mountain, to \u201cthe thick cloud where God was\u201d (20:18), until after the giving of the Torah. Note that Deut. 5:5 says, \u201cI stood between the Lord and you at that time to convey the Lord\u2019s words to you, for you were afraid of the fire and did not go up the mountain,\u201d as I did. Some explain that the Israelites were very afraid of the blare of the horn, which was growing \u201clouder and louder,\u201d and that Moses would tell them, \u201cPay attention, for now you are going to hear a Voice on such-and-such a subject,\u201d and immediately God would answer him \u201cby a voice.\u201d
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGod answered him in thunder. Literally, \u201cby a voice\u201d (OJPS). As Moses received each answer prophetically, a voice was miraculously created so that the Israelites could hear that God was communicating with him (Gersonides). This conversation was not God telling Moses the Ten Commandments; it was the exchange reported in vv. 21\u201324 (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:20\u201321
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why are the people warned a second time \u201cnot to break through\u201d (v. 21)?
\n\u2666 What is the meaning of \u201clest many of them perish\u201d?
\nExodus 19:20
\nRASHI
\nThe Lord came down upon Mount Sinai. Did He really come right down on the mountain? \u201cI spoke to you from the very heavens\u201d (20:19) teaches us that He bent the upper and lower heavens and spread them atop the mountain like a mattress on a bed, and the Throne of Glory came down upon them.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe Lord came down. The spirit, which is not a body, cannot be said to \u201ccome down\u201d or to \u201cgo up.\u201d How much less so the Lord, who is God of the spirits of all flesh! The text is speaking of the Presence of God, the Shekhinah.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe Lord came down upon Mount Sinai. If you gain enlightenment about this passage, you will understand that His great Name came down upon the mountain and dwelt there in fire, and it was this that spoke with Moses. Throughout this passage, it is \u201cthe Lord,\u201d the Tetragrammaton, who speaks with Moses, and the going up (v. 3) and the leading out (v. 17) are toward the place of the Presence, as I have explained in my comment to v. 3. It was \u201cthe Lord\u201d upon whom the people were warned \u201cnot to break through \u2026 to gaze\u201d (v. 21). For even the nobles of Israel did not see the Lord\u2014\u201cthey beheld God\u201d (24:11)\u2014but all Israel heard the Lord\u2019s voice from the fire. It is true that \u201cGod spoke all these words\u201d (20:1), but as our Sages said, \u201cGod\u201d represents Him in His aspect as judge. But they also said that Israel heard the first two commandments \u201cfrom the mouth of the Almighty,\u201d that is, the Lord. And, of course, as Deut. 5:19 makes clear, \u201cThe Lord spoke those words \u2026 to your whole congregation at the mountain.\u201d Deut. 5:4 says, \u201cFace to face the Lord spoke to you on the mountain out of the fire,\u201d and that is the meaning of \u201cface to face\u201d\u2014an encounter with the Lord. That is why 20:2 uses the phrase \u201cI the Lord am your God.\u201d Deut. 5:23, \u201cWhat mortal ever heard the voice of the living God speak out of the fire?\u201d does not contradict this; for the Israelites were speaking to Moses of what they themselves had apprehended, the Voice speaking. In Deut. 5:24 they say, \u201cYou go closer and hear all that the Lord our God says.\u201d Similarly, when Moses asks, \u201cHas any people heard the Voice of God speaking out of a fire, as you have, and survived?\u201d he is referring to the Voice speaking. This is the experience described in Num. 7:89: \u201cWhen Moses went into the Tent of Meeting to speak with Him, he would hear the Voice addressing him from above the cover that was on top of the Ark of the Pact between the two cherubim; thus He spoke to him.\u201d From this you will understand what our Sages are always saying in the midrash: \u201cThe Torah was given in seven voices.\u201d The seven voices are those mentioned in Ps. 29, and they are alluded to in this passage. There are seven \u201cvoices\u201d mentioned in Moses\u2019 retelling of the story in Deuteronomy 5, as well. B. Ber. 6b says there were only five voices, but they are counting only the five hidden voices; for two are written explicitly in the text. The point is that the Torah was given to Moses in seven voices, and it was only he who heard and contemplated them; but Israel heard it through a single voice, as Deut. 4:12 and Deut. 5:19 explain. Note that in 20:15, kolot, \u201cvoices,\u201d is spelled without the expected second vav, turning the word into a singular by subtracting from the seven voices the 6 that vav numerically represents. This is the True interpretation of Ps. 62:12, \u201cOne thing God has spoken; two things have I heard.\u201d Thus the passages describing the giving of the Torah are explained\u2014the details should not be interchanged.
\nExodus 19:21
\nRASHI
\nNot to break through to the Lord. Literally, \u201cnot to dismantle\u201d\u2014not to destroy the way they are situated, by drawing near to the side of the mountain on account of their desire to see the Lord. This verb, often translated \u201cdestroy,\u201d refers to taking something apart, e.g., a building. Similarly those who separate themselves from a place where people are situated \u201cdismantle\u201d that position. Lest many of them perish. Even if only a single one of them were to perish, that would be too many for Me.
\nRASHBAM
\nNot to break through from their position to draw near to gaze.
\nIBN EZRA
\nWarn the people not to break through the bounds you set around them to gaze, thinking they are doing the right thing by drawing close to the Presence to gaze at it out of their love for God.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo down. God wanted Moses to be with the people, not on the mountain, when the Ten Commandments were given (Abarbanel). Not to break through. Literally, \u201cnot to dismantle\u201d the single-file line in which they stood around the boundary (Bekhor Shor). Thinking that, having achieved face-to-face prophecy, they were in the same category as Moses (Sforno). To gaze. Other Masoretic traditions spell this word without a vav; but according to our knowledge of the mysteries, the vav is required here, indicating that they are not to look at the upper light that is with the aspect of God indicated by vav (Jacob b. Hayyim). If Moses were not with them, they might imagine they saw some form, or that the voice they heard was Moses\u2019 voice, not God\u2019s (Abarbanel). Lest many of them perish. Literally, \u201clest many of them fall\u201d intellectually and spiritually by imagining that God had a form. This has nothing to do with the stoning mentioned in v. 13 (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:22\u201324
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 Why does Moses say \u201cthe people cannot come up\u201d (v. 23) rather than \u201cthe people will not come up\u201d?
\n\u2666 Why is Moses told to go down and come back up with Aaron (v. 24)?
\n\u2666 Why are the priests mentioned?
\nExodus 19:22
\nRASHI
\nThe priests also. The first-born also, who perform God\u2019s service. Who come near the Lord. To offer sacrifices. Even they should not presume on their importance and go up. Must stay pure. Rather, \u201care summoned\u201d to remain standing in their place. Lest the Lord break out against them. It is this verb, not the verb used in v. 21, that means \u201cbreak through.\u201d What it means here is, \u201clest the Lord kill some of them and create a breach among them.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe priests. The first-born. Who come near the Lord. To bring peace offerings. Or perhaps it refers to the fact that they were the closest of the people to God. For the bounds were around the mountain, and the first-born were at the boundary. Behind them were the chiefs of the tribes; behind them in order were the elders, the officials, all the Israelite males who were of age to be commanded; then the children, the women, and the converts. We learn this from the second covenant that He made with Israel (Deut. 29:9\u201310), just as He had this first covenant here at Mount Sinai. Inside the boundary was Aaron, and further inside was Moses\u2014for the two of them went a little way up the mountain, and all Israel could see them.
\nNAHMANIDES
\nThe priests also, who come near the Lord. For it is to the Lord that they bring the sacrifices near, and to Him that they come near with them.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nThe priests. These were the 70 elders, all of whom were first-borns. It cannot literally mean \u201cpriests,\u201d for none had been ordained yet (Hizkuni). Apparently Aaron\u2019s sons are already called priests based on their future status as such (Gersonides).
\nExodus 19:23\u201324
\nRASHBAM
\nThe people cannot come up to Mount Sinai. Those who explain Moses to be asking God, \u201cWhy must you tell me this again a second time?\u201d are mistaken. For one exhorts the person when it is time to do the deed even after having already exhorted him in advance: \u201cNow is the time to do what I told you.\u201d V. 24 too\u2014what does it add? In fact, Moses was asking a question. \u201cThe day before yesterday You told me, \u2018The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai.\u2019 When You warned the people (through me) to set bounds, You told me, \u2018Beware of going up the mountain\u2019 (v. 12). Now you tell me they must not \u2018break through to the Lord.\u2019 Are You telling me now that even moving forward a little bit to gaze, still far from the mountain, is forbidden?\u201d The Holy One replied, \u201cGo down, and come back together with Aaron; but let not the priests or the people break through to come up to the Lord. I am not saying anything about not gazing. As long as they do not go up the mountain, I do not care.\u201d
\nExodus 19:23
\nRASHI
\nThe people cannot come up. I do not need to warn them. For they have already been warned the whole three days, and they cannot go up, for they do not have permission.
\nIBN EZRA
\nThe people cannot come up. Saadia said that he spent many years agonizing over the meaning of this phrase, until he saw in a book of Persian court etiquette that an emissary is not permitted to tell the king \u201cI have fulfilled the mission you sent me on\u201d until he commands him to do something else\u2014at which time he can say it. But if this explanation is correct, why do we again find in v. 24, \u201cThe Lord said to him, \u2018Go down\u2019 \u201d? In my opinion, it means just what it says. God tells Moses, \u201cGo down, warn the people\u201d (v. 21). Moses did not know what need there was to warn them, which he had already done. Was he supposed to warn them specifically not \u201cto gaze\u201d? So God told him, \u201cThe people cannot come up.\u201d But they could look as long as they did not leave their places. Then God told him, \u201cGo down to warn them as I instructed you.\u201d For only God knew that Israel needed to be warned a second time, when the actual moment came.
\nExodus 19:24
\nRASHI
\nGo down. Warn them again. For one exhorts people in preparation for doing something, and again when it is time to do it. Come back together with Aaron. One might read the verse this way: \u201cYou shall come up, you, and Aaron with you, and the priests.\u201d Repeating \u201cyou\u201d shows that \u201cyou\u201d and Aaron and the priests were all relegated to separate areas. Moses was to come closer than Aaron, and Aaron closer than the priests. But let not \u2026 the people break through at all.
\nIBN EZRA
\nCome back. Inside the boundary, to the mountain. But not too far from the Israelites, who (after the Ten Commandments) will ask you to speak to them instead of Me. Let not the priests or the people break through to come up to the Lord. Here is Saadia\u2019s answer. The people needed to be warned again, at the last minute, not to break through.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nGo down. And warn them again. For the Holy One wanted to be certain that nothing would mar the giving of the Torah (Bekhor Shor). Seeing that Moses was looking for an excuse not to go down, God told him again (Abarbanel). Come back together with Aaron. This has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments, but refers to the events of 24:1 (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 19:25\u201320:1
\nABARBANEL\u2019S QUESTIONS
\n\u2666 How exactly did Israel receive the Ten Commandments when \u201cGod spoke all these words\u201d (v. 1)?
\n\u2666 Why are they called the \u201cTen\u201d Commandments, when one counts at least 13 commandments or over 15 different sayings included in them?
\n\u2666 Why is there such a mixture of positive and negative commandments?
\n\u2666 Why is one punished in such different ways for violating the different commandments?
\n\u2666 Why are the commandments written in this order?
\n\u2666 Why are the five commandments from the second tablet, dealing with human relations, more important than, e.g., \u201cYou shall not defraud your fellow\u201d (Lev. 19:13) or \u201cLove your fellow as yourself\u201d (Lev. 19:18), which are not included in the Ten Commandments?
\n\u2666 Why are some commandments explained and some not?
\n\u2666 Why do some commandments threaten punishment and others not?
\nExodus 19:25
\nRASHI
\nAnd spoke to them. This warning.
\nRASHBAM
\nMoses went down to the people and spoke to them. Literally, \u201cAnd said to them\u201d\u2014\u201cthe commandment about the bounds begins as of now.\u201d
\nIBN EZRA
\nMoses went down to the people and spoke to them. He warned them and the priests not to break through to gaze. The text does not mention that Moses and Aaron went back up, for this was not necessary. Since God told him they should come back up, we know that they did. As Moses reminds the Israelites later, \u201cI stood between the Lord and you at that time\u201d (Deut. 5:5). As soon as they did so, God began to speak.
\nADDITIONAL COMMENTS
\nSpoke to them. Literally, \u201csaid to them\u201d\u2014that only he and Aaron had permission to go up to the Lord (Hizkuni). So you know that Moses was at the foot of the mountain, with the people, when the Ten Commandments were given (Abarbanel).
\nExodus 20:1<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n