Parshat Yitro 2009
© 2009 Rabbi Ari Kahn
“Saying…”
2448 years after creation, after 210 years in Egypt, after 86 years of servitude, after 7 weeks of freedom, the heavens are about to open – and the word of God will flow. A symphony of sound will burst out, but not just any sound: palpable sound. This is sound that is not merely heard. This is truth - truth you can see and feel. This is theophony; this is Revelation.
But before the content of the Revelation is imparted, before the words of God are perceived by the Children of Israel, after the thunder and lightning fill up the sky, there is one last verse, perhaps an introduction to the Decalogue:
ספר שמות פרק כ
(א) וַיְדַבֵּר אֱלֹהִים אֵת כָּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה לֵאמֹר:
And the Almighty spoke all of these things, saying- (Shmot 20:1)
While each and every word in this verse deserves attention, there is one word in particular that catches our attention. The final word in the verse, laymor (“saying”), seems extraneous, and therefore incomprehensible. The word is familiar to us from what may be the most often - repeated verse in the Torah, “And God said to Moshe, saying”. In that usage, the intention is for Moshe to repeat the dictate, to share the Word of God with the People. But in this instance, the entire nation is present. All of the Jews stand at the foot of the mountain, and they presumably[1] hear and see the Word of God. Why is “saying” necessary here, when God Himself is speaking to all the people directly?[2]
Two Torahs
Commentaries have struggled with this word – and offered all types of suggestions: The Sfat Emet[3], for example, points to the use of the word laymor in this verse as an indication of the co-existence of Oral Torah with the written Torah about to be transmitted. In this view, two distinct aspects of Oral Torah are brought to the fore, as we are enjoined to teach the Oral Torah for two reasons: The Oral Law fulfills a very critical functional role, enabling us to apply the principles of the written Torah in subsequent generations. Additionally, the ongoing learning of the Oral Torah is seen as a sort of ongoing revelation. As Torah is learned and applied to new situations, the Word of God is continually brought into human experience. The Oral Law is what keeps us in touch with the Sinai experience.[4] This dovetails with the idea that the totality of Torah was revealed at Sinai - including that which would be revealed to future generations.[5] This idea, according to Rav Zvi Elimelech Shapira of Dinov in his Igra Dkala, is encapsulated in the word laymor: By studying and applying the Torah, future generations return to what was said at Sinai.[6] Furthermore, the authenticity of the teachings of later scholars is established by linking it to the experience at Sinai.
Knowing God
The Maor VaShemesh (Rav Klonomous Kalman Epstein) connects the word laymor to the next verse – “Anochi” - “I am the Lord God…”
Ultimately, the most important Commandment is the first: “Anochi”, the knowledge or acknowledgment of God, transcends all other Commandments and is the raison d’etre of all the Commandments. Lacking belief in God, the other Commandments become absurd. Indeed, the very word “commandment” becomes an oxymoron without God. Hence, citing a teaching of Rav Elimelech of Lizhansk, the Maor VaShemesh explains that all of the Torah is encapsulated in Anochi, for if a person accepts this first precept – they will then necessarily comply with the Torah as a whole; profound belief will lead to profound observance. The reverse is true as well: through the performance of the mitzvot we will come to know God.[7] “The word laymor is therefore linked to Anochi : ‘Laymor (saying) Anochi,’ for this will lead to the performance of all the other Commandments. And when you fulfill the Commandments, you will discover Anochi - God.” Our verse, then, should be rendered thus: ‘God spoke all of these things in order to bring the Jews to say (or comprehend) “Anochi”.[8]
The Shem Mishmuel (Rav Shmuel Bornstein) explains the superfluous ‘laymor’ in our verse from a different angle. Elsewhere in his commentary, Rashi cites a tradition that all the of the Ten Commandments were transmitted simultaneously – “in one utterance.” With their limited, human sensory capacity, the Jews were incapable of grasping this type of Divine speech. In order for them to understand the content of God’s communication, says the Shem Mishmuel, it was necessary for Moshe to speak, to relay the Word of God in a more human form, just as he did on all the other occasions when the text includes the term laymor, “saying”.[9]
Revelation and Response
This tradition notwithstanding, Rashi himself offers a different explanation for the idiosyncratic language of this particular verse. Rashi addresses the problem of laymor with a somewhat enigmatic comment:
רש"י על שמות פרק כ פסוק א
לאמר - מלמד שהיו עונין על הן הן ועל לאו לאו
This teaches that in response to the positive Commandments they said “yes” and to the negative commandments they said “no” (Rashi Shmot 20:1).
Laymor , “saying”, indicates that the people responded with a resounding “Yes!” when they received positive Commandments, and with a heartfelt “No!” when the Commandment was in the negative form (a prohibition). Yet Rashi’s comment leaves none the wiser as to the exact meaning or purpose of the words of our verse, since we still do not know what precisely the word “laymor” refers to, and what the significance of the Peoples’ response is.
Looking back to Rashi’s source, we find a difference of opinion in the Mechilta; Rashi cites the view ascribed to Rabbi Yishmael.
מכילתא פרשת בחדש פרשה ד
לאמר. שהיו אומרי' על הן הן ועל לאו לאו דברי רבי ישמעאל. רבי עקיבא אומר על הן הן ועל לאו הן.
They would respond “Yes” to positive Commandments and “No” to negative Commandments; this is the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva (disagrees and) says that to the positive Commandments they responded “Yes” and to the negative commandments they responded “Yes”.
We should address two distinct issues raised by this source and Rashi’s treatment of it. First, what exactly is the disagreement between the two Talmudic authorities? Secondly, why does Rashi cite the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, given the Talmudic principle that Rabbi Akiva’s is the decisive, accepted opinion in all cases of disagreement with his contemporaries?[10] The Maharal, and later, Rabbi Soloveitchik both explain the argument: Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yishmael agree that regarding the positive commandments the Jewish People responded and said “yes we will” – for example, when God said ‘Remember the Sabbath Day to sanctify it’, the people responded, “yes we will”. The difference of opinion is regarding the negative commandments. Rabbi Yishmael taught that “do not murder” was rejoined with “no (we will not murder)”. While Rabbi Akiva taught that the people said “yes, (we will not murder)”.[11] There is a deep philosophical question at the heart of this seemingly trivial difference of opinion, summed up by Rav Soloveitchik as follows:
Should performance of a mitzvah result from an extraneous norm imposed upon finite man by the infinite, inscrutable Will of G-d, or should performance result from an inner urge whose realization enhances life and exalts the personality? This dichotomy [is often expressed as the central issue] of "metzuveh ve'oseh", whether reward is greater for one who performs a mitzvah as a result of an imperative or for one whose observance results from personal initiative. [12] Rabbi Akiva’s opinion expresses a very distinct approach to this question. He maintained that B'nei Yisrael's response was yes to all pronouncements, including the negative ones. In other words, their response was, "we surrender to Your will, we accept the norm, we shall comply with it". Even though the negative precepts are acceptable to and sanctioned by any civilized society, they require commitment and surrender to G-d nonetheless. Without surrender to Anochi, moral behavior is removed from the sphere of observance. God is taken out of the equation. The result is homocentric morality, observance of commandments that are socially acceptable at any given time or place.
Rabbi Akiva therefore maintained that morality must not rely solely on man's cognitive abilities, even in regard to mishpatim, since certain domains are inaccessible to human moral exploration and illumination. Yet the entire structure of morality would collapse should society actually permit their violation.”[13]
Rabbi Yishmael’s view is quite different. When they respond “no” to prohibitions – such as, “No, we will not murder,” they acknowledge that murder is wrong. Indeed, according to Rabbi Yishmael, the people already believe murder is wrong. The Word of God confirms what they already know. There exists, according to this opinion, “natural moral law”, and this, too, is part of the Revelation.
Rabbi Akiva’s understanding of the acceptance of Torah is far more arduous and demanding: Man goes against his nature, man does not necessarily agree with the value statement or judgment, yet he accepts the Word of God, the authority of God. The People’s response, “Yes” to both positive and negative Commandments, removes observance from the sphere of human morality and places it exclusively in the realm of obedience, acquiescence to God’s command.
When explaining the text of the Torah, Rashi takes into account the reality of that particular moment at Mount Sinai. There, the Jewish People experience God firsthand. In the context of such an overwhelming experience, Rabbi Yishmael’s view may have made more sense to Rashi: When God speaks directly to the Jews, as individuals and as a society, the logic and morality of each and every Commandment, positive and negative, is unavoidable. Everything is illuminated, crystal-clear. Torah, when presented in this way, is obvious and perfect. [14] At that particular, unique moment in history, acceptance and obedience, practice and theory are indivisible. At that moment, responding “no” to prohibitions was both a statement of agreement and of obedience, for there was no gap between the two. Rabbi Yishmael’s opinion was the more appropriate one in Rashi’s eyes because it most faithfully explained the verse itself. [15]
On the other hand, Rabbi Akiva’s explanation is more apt for subsequent generations, for whom obedience, submission to the Word of God and the rejection of moral relativism is the very core of true observance. When the words are not accompanied by thunder and lightning, we accept the law even when its logic escapes us.[16] Rabbi Akiva believed that acceptance of the Torah is predicated upon accepting the Yoke of Heaven: whether we understand or not, we accept. Whether we desire what is forbidden or not, we obey.
Whether we say “Yes we will”, “no we won’t”, or “yes, we won’t” we speak as a response to the theophony. Whether we still hear the echoes of the Divine words, or if the thunder and lightning have abated, we accept the Torah, in every generation – whether or not we agree completely or understand completely - because sometimes we can only understand after we obey. We hope and pray that what we don’t understand will become clear when we live a life of Torah.
[1] See Shmot 19:9:
ספר שמות פרק יט
(ט) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן בַּעֲבוּר יִשְׁמַע הָעָם בְּדַבְּרִי עִמָּךְ וְגַם בְּךָ יַאֲמִינוּ לְעוֹלָם וַיַּגֵּד משֶׁה אֶת דִּבְרֵי הָעָם אֶל ה’:
God tells Moshe that He will speak to him from the cloud so that the nation will witness this speech. The implication is that the main beneficiary of the Divine word at Sinai was Moshe, and the others were there to see God speak to Moshe. This approach may be supported by the Rambam in the Guide for the Perplexed, Part 2 Chapter 35, where the Rambam delineates the supremacy of Moshe’s prophecy.
[2] Many of the commentaries note this textual difficulty, including the Maharal in the Gur Aryeh, and the Mizrachi, and Rav Dovid Halevi in the Taz, Rav Zadok of Lublin in Pri Zadik, and others.
פרוש הט"ז על התורה - שמות פרק כ פסוק א
לאמר, מלמד שהיו עונין כו'. דכל לאמר הוא שיחזור השומע ויאמר לאחר מה ששמע הוא וכאן שמעו כל ישראל ולמי יצטרכו לחזור ולהגיד. וכן בכ"מ שאין שייך שם לומר לאחרים צריך פירוש על מלת לאמר:
ספר פרי צדיק פרשת יתרו - אות יא
[יא] וידבר אלהים את כל הדברים האלה לאמר. תיבת לאמר לכאורה אין לו פירוש כאן
[3] The Sfat Emet makes this point on numerous occasions. See Sfat Emet Yitro 5640, Yitro 5641 and Shavuot 5647
שפת אמת ספר שמות - פרשת יתרו - שנת [תרמ"א]
ברש"י לאמר שהיו עונין על הן הן כו'. הוא ענין תורה שבע"פ שאומרים וחיי עולם נטע בתוכינו והוא העדות שהתורה מיוחדת לבנ"י שנמשכו מיד אחר הדברות. והוא כענין אין טפה יורדת משמים שאין טיפיים עולות לנגדה. וע"ז דרשו חז"ל ה' עוזי ומעוזי. שהתורה נק' עוז. ומעוזי הוא כח התורה שבע"פ. שהגם שהחכמים מוציאין בחכמתם. הוא רק כח הש"י שנטע בתוכינו:
שפת אמת ספר שמות - פרשת יתרו - שנת [תר"מ]
לכן כ' יום אשר עמדת לפני ה' כו' כמלאכים שנק' עומדים כו'. והמכוון שבנ"י יאמרו וימשכו אותן הדיברות מדרגה אחר מדרגה עד שיתקרבו כל הברואים. כי חיות הכל בתורה. ותיקון הכל בכח התורה. וז"ש לאמר שצריך כל אדם מישראל להעיד בכל יום על הבורא ית' כמ"ש שמע ישראל פעמים בכל יום. ודברים אלו מאירין לכל העולם ולכל הברואים. וברש"י לאמר מלמד שהיו עונין על הן הן כו'. והיינו שאין דיברות הבורא ית' כדיברות ב"ו. רק הדיברות היו חקוקים בלבם. והיינו דכ' רואים את הקולות. היינו בלבם ראו שנתקיים מיד. וניתקנו נפשותם שנמשכו אחר הדיברות. וזהו ענין תורה שבע"פ שכ' חיי עולם נטע בתוכינו שנבללו דברי תורה בנפשותם. וז"ש ומעוזי. היינו שנעשו מעצמות בנ"י תורה שנק' עוז:
שפת אמת ספר במדבר - לשבועות - שנת [תרמ"ז]
וז"ש וידבר כו' לאמר. פרש"י שהיו עונין על הן כו'. פי' שהקב"ה נתן דיבורו בפיהם של ישראל שיוכלו להוציא מעינות מים חיים מן התורה. וזהו ענין תורה שבע"פ ה' האמירך וע"ז כתיב דברי אשר שמתי בפיך כי שימה הוא סידור שבפי איש ישראל מתיישבין הדברי'.
[4] Chapter of the Fathers 3:2,6
משנה מסכת אבות פרק ג
אֲבָל שְׁנַיִם שֶׁיּוֹשְׁבִין וְיֵשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶם דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה, שְׁכִינָה שְׁרוּיָה בֵינֵיהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלאכי ג), אָז נִדְבְּרוּ יִרְאֵי יְיָ אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וַיַּקְשֵׁב יְיָ וַיִּשְׁמָע וַיִּכָּתֵב סֵפֶר זִכָּרוֹן לְפָנָיו לְיִרְאֵי יְיָ וּלְחשְׁבֵי שְׁמוֹ. אֵין לִי אֶלָּא שְׁנָיִם. מִנַּיִן שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ אֶחָד שֶׁיּוֹשֵׁב וְעוֹסֵק בַּתּוֹרָה, שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא קוֹבֵעַ לוֹ שָׂכָר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (איכה ג), יֵשֵׁב בָּדָד וְיִדֹּם כִּי נָטַל עָלָיו:
(ו) רַבִּי חֲלַפְתָּא בֶן דּוֹסָא אִישׁ כְּפַר חֲנַנְיָה אוֹמֵר, עֲשָׂרָה שֶׁיּוֹשְׁבִין וְעוֹסְקִין בַּתּוֹרָה, שְׁכִינָה שְׁרוּיָה בֵינֵיהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים פב), אֱלֹהִים נִצָּב בַּעֲדַת אֵל. וּמִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ חֲמִשָּׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (עמוס ט), וַאֲגֻדָּתוֹ עַל אֶרֶץ יְסָדָהּ. וּמִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ שְׁלשָׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים פב), בְּקֶרֶב אֱלֹהִים יִשְׁפֹּט. וּמִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ שְׁנַיִם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלאכי ג), אָז נִדְבְּרוּ יִרְאֵי ה' אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וַיַּקְשֵׁב ה' וַיִּשְׁמָע וְגוֹ'. וּמִנַּיִן אֲפִלּוּ אֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כ), בְּכָל הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אַזְכִּיר אֶת שְׁמִי אָבוֹא אֵלֶיךָ וּבֵרַכְתִּיךָ:
Mishnah 2. But [when] two sit together and there are words of Torah [spoken] between them, the shechinah abides among them, as it is said: ‘Then they that feared the Lord spoke one with another; and the Lord hearkened and heard, and a book of remembrance was written before him, for them that feared the Lord and that thought upon his name.’ I have no [scriptural proof for the presence of the shechinah] except [among] two, whence [is there proof that] even [when there is only] one [person]. The Holy One, Blessed be He, appoints unto him a reward? Since it is said: ‘Though he sit alone and [meditate] in stillness, yet he takes [a reward] unto himself.’
Mishnah 6. R. Halafta [a man) of K’far Hanania said: [When there are] ten sitting together and occupying themselves with Torah, the Shechinah abides among them, as it is said: ‘God stands in the congregation of God.’ And whence [do we infer that the same applies] even [when there are] five? [from] that which is said: ‘And He has founded His band upon the earth.’ And whence [do we infer that the same applies] even [when there are three?] [From] that which is said: ‘In the midst of the judges he judges.’ And whence [do we infer that the same applies] even [where there are] two? [From] that which is said: ‘Then they that fear the Lord spoke one with another, and the Lord hearkened, and heard etc.’ And whence [do we infer that the same applies] even [when there is] one? [From] that which is said: ‘In every place where I cause my Name to be mentioned I will come unto you and bless you.’
[5] See Talmud Bavli Brachot 5a, Talmud Yerushalmi Peah chapter 2 Halcha 4 (17a)
תלמוד בבלי מסכת ברכות דף ה עמוד א
ואמר רבי לוי בר חמא אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש: מאי דכתיב +שמות כ"ד+ ואתנה לך את לחת האבן והתורה והמצוה אשר כתבתי להורתם, לחות - אלו עשרת הדברות, תורה - זה מקרא, והמצוה - זו משנה, אשר כתבתי - אלו נביאים וכתובים, להרתם - זה תלמוד; מלמד שכולם נתנו למשה מסיני.
תלמוד ירושלמי פיאה פרק ב דף יז עמוד א /ה"ד
רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר עליהם ועליהם כל ככל דברים הדברים מקרא משנה תלמוד ואגדה אפילו מה שתלמיד וותיק עתיד להורות לפני רבו כבר נאמר למשה בסיני מה טעם יש דבר שיאמ' ראה זה חדש הוא וגו' משיבו חבירו ואומר לו כבר היה לעולמים
Talmud Bavli Brachot 5a - R. Levi b. Hama says further in the name of R. Simeon b. Lakish: What is the meaning of the verse: ‘And I will give you the tablets of stone, and the law and the commandment, which I have written that you may teach them? ‘Tablets of stone’: these are the Ten Commandments; ‘the law’: this is the Pentateuch; ‘the commandment’: this is the Mishnah; ‘which I have written’: these are the Prophets and the Hagiographa; ‘that you may teach them’: this is the Gemara. It teaches [us] that all these things were given to Moshe on Sinai.
[6] See Igra D’kala page 201a
ספר אגרא דכלה - דף רא/א
והוא סוד מלכותך מלכות כל עולמים (תהלים קמה יג). והנה המדרש הזה בא לבאר וידבר אלקים את כל הדברים האלה לאמ"ר. דקשה למה אמר כל הדברים. וגם מהו הלאמר. והנה בא לבאר לנו ענין הלאמר הוא השי"ת דבר בקדשו כללות דברי תורה דברים כוללים שיתאמרו בכל דור ודור כל ימי עולם, היינו בדברי נותן התורה כלול כל מה שתלמיד ותיק עתיד לחדש, ובכל דור ודור כל חכם לב בישראל, זה מחדש ומוליד דבר זה, וזה דבר חידוש אחר, הכל מדברי אלקים חיים זה מחדש ומוליד דבר וכו', בכל פעם שכל משכל ומושכל ממושכל כמדליק נר מנר.
[7] Maor VaShemesh, Parshat Yitro.
ספר מאור ושמש - פרשת יתרו ד"ה איתא
איתא במדרש רבה זכור ושמור בדיבור אחד נאמרו. נוכל לפרש על פי ששמעתי מפה הקדוש הרב רבינו אלימלך זצוק"ל על פסוק וידבר אלהים את כל הדברים האלה לאמר אנכי ה' אלהיך כי לכאורה מלת לאמר הוא כמיותר. ופירש הוא ז"ל שהקב"ה נתן לנו התורה והמצות וכל התורה כולה הוא כלול באנכי ה' אלהיך כי זה עיקר הכל אם אדם מקבל אלהותו יתברך שמו עליו על ידי זה הוא שומר ומקיים את כל התורה שלא לעבור על לא תעשה חלילה ומקיים המצות עשה וכל התורה והמצות הם נתיב אשר על ידם נוכל לידע מאלהותו יתברך שמו, וזהו וידבר אלהים את כל הדברים האלה לאמר אנכי ה' אלהיך פירוש שבכלל אנכי הוא כל התורה כולה ולכן דבר הקב"ה כל דיבור ודיבור בפני עצמו כדי שנוכל לבא על ידו שנדע אלהותו יתברך שמו. וזהו וידבר אלהים את כל הדברים האלה כדי לאמר אנכי ה' אלהיך כלומר על ידי קיום המצות והתורה נוכל להשיג השגות אלהותו יתברך שמו, וכל התורה כולה היא תלויה באנכי דהיינו אם האדם מאמין באלהותו ממילא בודאי מקיים התורה והמצות כראוי ואם חלילה אינו מאמין באלהותו ממילא אינו רוצה לקיים התורה והמצות.
[8]This train of thought has significant ramifications for modern Jewish education: How can we break into this circle of teaching and observance; which comes first, theory or observance? In the “normal” situation, a child is drawn into the world of mitzvoth as cognition allows that particular practice to be performed. For thousands of years, children learned how to perform mitzvoth by observing their surroundings, and acquired theoretical or philosophical insight as they developed in their practice. In today’s world there are those whose first experience of observance is in adulthood. The onset of observance and learning are not always able to be lock-stepped, for there are some commandments that can’t be performed until one understands the ideas, and some ideas that can’t be understood until performed. Not all mitzvoth are the same. Additionally, not all people are the same. Different people connect with different mitzvot naturally and spontaneously, while others may be out of reach, or less easily incorporated or understood.
[9] Shem Mishmuel Yitro 5672
ספר שם משמואל פרשת יתרו - שנת תרע"ב
וידבר אלקים את כל הדברים האלה. פירש"י מלמד שאמר הקב"ה עשרת הדברות בדבור אחד וכו', מה ת"ל עוד אנכי ולא יהי' לך שחזר ופירש על כל דיבור ודיבור בפני עצמו: ונראה דמה שאמר תחילה כל הדברות בדבור אחד לא הבינו ישראל כלל מדהצריך לחזור ולומר כל דבור ודבור בפני עצמו. ועוד הרי אמרו בש"ס ר"ה (כ"ז.) זכור ושמור בדיבור אחד נאמרו מה שאין הפה יכול לדבר ואין האוזן יכולה לשמוע, ומכ"ש כל עשרת הדברות ביחד. וא"כ יש להבין מה תועלת היתה לדבור זה הכללי. ונראה דשורש הנשמה טרם באה בהתחלקות החושים, ואולי היא בחי' יחידה,
[10] Talmud Bavli Eruvin 46a
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף מו/ב
אמרו הלכה כרבי עקיבא מחבירו
[11] Maharal Tiferet YIsrael chapter 34.
ספר תפארת ישראל - פרק לד
וקאמר ר' ישמעאל שהיו אומרים על הן הן ועל לאו לאו, באור זה כי היו מקבלים כל דבור כפי מה שהוא כי כאשר אמר אנכי היו מקבלים עליהם הדבור לומר כי כך נעשה, וכאשר אמר לא יהיה לך קבלו עליהם הדבור לא יהיה לנו אלהים אחרים כפי אשר היה הדבור היו מקבלים עליהם הדבור. אבל רבי עקיבא סבר כאשר אמר להן אנכי וגו' היו מקבלין עליהן הדבור לומר כי כך נעשה, וכאשר אמר לא יהיה לך קבלו גם כן הן כלומר דבר זה כמו שגזרת עלינו. על דעת ר"י היה הקבלה מחולקת לעשה ולא תעשה, ולדעת רבי עקיבא היה קבלה אחת רק כך נעשה כמו שגזרת. וטעם רבי ישמעאל כי צריך שתהיה קבלת הגזרה כאשר היא עצם הגזרה בעצמה, אם הגזרה לעשות דבר כך הקבלה לעשות דבר זה, ואם הגזרה שלא לעשות דבר זה קבלת הגזרה כך גם כן שלא לעשות דבר זה. אבל רבי עקיבא סבר שאין קבלת הגזרה רק לקבל בלבד הגזרה תהיה הגזרה מה שהיא הגזרה, ולכך היו אומרים על לאו ועל הן קבלת הגזרה בענין אחד, והיינו שאמרו הן כי דבר זה הוא מצד המקבל שהוא מקבל עליו כל מה שיאמר הגוזר לדבר שלא יעשה או מה שיעשה אין צריך רק שיקבל שהוא מוכן לעשות רצון הגוזר וזה שיאמר הן. ודי בזה:
[12]Lecture presented to the Rabbinical Council of America by Rabbi Yosef Soloveitchik on June 22, 1972.The Rav indicated that if in this dispute the choice were his, he would be guided by the rule, "Halacha keRebbe Akiva", and would accept Akiva's interpretation. “Surrender and obedience are most necessary,
not only for chukim but for mishpatim as well…. With regards to the sin of murder, man, no matter what persuasion, faith or ideology indignantly condemns the murderer and the act of murder. Yet, what about a situation which Dostoevsky portrayed so vividly in Crime and Punishment? The book depicts a cruel, miserly old woman who is a loan shark sucking the blood of those unfortunates caught in her web; a person who evicts the old and frail on a winter day in below zero temperatures. In sharp contrast, also depicted is a brilliant young student who cannot afford to continue his medical studies and who hopelessly watches his sister being sold into white slavery and exiled to some oriental country. A loan of a few hundred rubles could have remedied his problems, yet the old woman refused to lend him the money. In a moment of despair the student kills the miser. Do we have the right to condemn the student? Should we consider such a murder a crime? Again the answer is Rabbi Akiva's 'hen'; the Almighty has forbidden murder, whatever the motive…
[13] ibid.
[14] Perhaps this is the meaning of the Gemara that at Sinai God upended the mountain and held it over the heads of the people, forcing them to accept the Torah. I would suggest that this passage is not to be taken literally; rather, when God spoke to them, they had no choice but to accept the Torah. See Talmud Bavli Shabbat 88a.
תלמוד בבלי מסכת שבת דף פח/א
ויתיצבו בתחתית ההר אמר רב אבדימי בר חמא בר חסא מלמד שכפה הקדוש ברוך הוא עליהם את ההר כגיגית ואמר להם אם אתם מקבלים התורה מוטב ואם לאו שם תהא קבורתכם
[15] Rashi sees his mandate to explain the text of the Torah, and will choose the Halachic opinion that fits into the plain reading most easily. See Rashi on Bereishit 33:20
רש"י על בראשית פרק לג פסוק כ
ודברי תורה כפטיש יפוצץ סלע מתחלקים לכמה טעמים ואני ליישב פשוטו של מקרא באתי.
[16] Rabbi Soloveitchik in this lecture introduced a concept known as efshi, ei efshi, The Rambam in his commentary to the Mishna, in the introduction to Avot (shmoneh prakim) writes that there some laws that are perfectly natural, and religiously acceptable to desire, like eating milk and meat, wearing shatnez, certain sexual laws, a person may feel that he or she desires to break these laws, but they surrender to God and abstain. There are other laws like murder, that a person should know is wrong and not desire.
רמב"ם פירוש המשניות - שמנה פרקים להרמב"ם - פרק ו
וכאשר חקרנו דברי חכמים בזה הענין, נמצא להם שהמתאוה לעבירות ונכסף אליהן הוא יותר חשוב ויותר שלם מאשר לא יתאוה אליהן ולא יצטער בהנחתן, עד שאמרו, שכל אשר יהיה האדם יותר חשוב ויותר שלם תהיה תשוקתו להעבירות והצטערו בהנחתן יותר גדולות. והביאו בזה הדברים ואמרו (סוכה נ"ב) "כל הגדול מחברו יצרו גדול הימנו", ולא דים זה, עד שאמרו, ששכר המושל בנפשו גדול לפי רוב צערו במשלו בנפשו, ואמרו (אבות פרק ב') "לפום צערא אגרא". ויותר מזה, שהם צוו להיות האדם מתאוה לעבירות, עד שהזהירו מלומר, שאני בטבעי לא אתאוה לזאת העבירה, ואף על פי שלא אסרה התורה, והוא אמרם (ספרא קדושים), "רבי שמעון בן גמליאל אומר, לא יאמר אדם אי אפשי לאכול בשר בחלב, אי אפשי ללבוש שעטנז, אי אפשי לבא על הערוה, אלא אפשי ומה אעשה ואבי שבשמים גזר עלי". ולפי המובן מפשוטי שני המאמרים בתחלת המחשבה הם סותרים זה את זה, ואין הענין כן, אבל שניהם אמת ואין מחלוקת ביניהם כלל, והוא שהרעות אשר הן אצל הפילוסופים רעות, אשר אמרו, שמי שלא יתאוה אליהן יותר חשוב מן המתאוה אליהן ויכבוש את יצרו מהן, הם הענינים המפורסמים אצל כל בני אדם שהם רעים כשפיכת דמים, כגנבה וגזלה, ואונאה, ולהזיק למי שלא הרע לו, ולגמול רע למטיב לו, ולבזות אב ואם וכיוצא באלו, והן המצוות שאמרו עליהן חכמים זכרונם לברכה, (יומא ס"ז) שאילו לא נכתבו ראויות הן ליכתב, ויקראו אותן קצת חכמינו האחרונים, אשר חלו חלי. המדברים מצוות השכליות. ואין ספק שהנפש אשר תכסף לדבר מהן ותשתוקק אליו, שהיא חסרה ושהנפש החשובה לא תתאוה לאחת מאלו הרעות כלל, ולא תצטער בהמנעה מהן.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Parshat B’shalach
Parshat B’shalach
© 2009 Rabbi Ari Kahn
The Eleventh Plague
With the ten plagues behind them, the Jews leave Egypt and head to Mount Sinai. In fact, Sinai had been on the itinerary from the outset of the Exodus story; a critical stop on the way to the Promised Land, Mount Sinai was one of the objectives of the Exodus.
שמות פרק ג
(ח) וָאֵרֵד לְהַצִּילוֹ מִיַּד מִצְרַיִם וּלְהַעֲלֹתוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא אֶל אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה וּרְחָבָה אֶל אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ אֶל מְקוֹם הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי:…(יב) וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֶהְיֶה עִמָּךְ וְזֶה לְּךָ הָאוֹת כִּי אָנֹכִי שְׁלַחְתִּיךָ בְּהוֹצִיאֲךָ אֶת הָעָם מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה:
(Shmot) 3:8 I will come down (or, I am descending) to rescue them from the grip of Egypt and bring them up out of that land to a good, spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, the territory of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Yevusites….3:12 'Because I will be with you,' replied [God]. 'And this will be the sign that I have sent you: When you take the People out of Egypt you will all then serve God on this mountain.'
When God first spoke to Moshe and empowered him to act as His messenger, the events that would unfold at Sinai were foretold. But after Pharoh relents, and before they reach Sinai, another major event occurs, an event whose nature is unclear. How are we to understand the splitting of the sea? Each step they take from the moment they are freed leads them both one step further from Egypt and one step closer to the Revelation at Sinai. How, then, should we view the events at the sea? Is this an introduction to the Sinai experience or the final chapter of leaving Egypt?
While the topic of this week’s parsha is a direct continuation of the preceding chapter, there is nonetheless a shift. This ambiguity requires the modern reader to shed some rather ingrained preconceptions: At no time, in no way does the Torah state that there will be ten plagues. This is a man-made categorization. We are so accustomed to seeing ten plagues, that the splitting of the sea is automatically assigned a category of its own, sui generis, unique and separate. The events of Parshat B’shalach are assumed to be distinct from those of the preceding parsha, apart from the ten plagues that are organically connected to leaving Egypt. But why? Why is the splitting of the sea seen as a separate event and not as the eleventh plague?
It may be instructive to take a step back and view the larger framework: The events at Sinai are conceptually divided between two elements: the Revelation itself, and the content of that Revelation - the experience of seeing the heavens open and hearing the voice of God, on the one hand, and the concepts which were imparted through that experience, on the other. Similarly, at the splitting of the sea we may discern two distinct elements. The Egyptians experienced punishment on a scale previously unknown to them, while the Israelites experienced revelation:
ספר שמות פרק טו
(ב) עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ וַיְהִי לִי לִישׁוּעָה זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ אֱלֹהֵי אָבִי וַאֲרֹמֲמֶנְהוּ:
My strength and song is God And this is my deliverance; This is my God, I will enshrine Him, My father's God and I will exalt Him. (Shmot 15:2)
Rashi explains:
רש"י על שמות פרק טו פסוק ב
זה אלי - בכבודו נגלה עליהם והיו מראין אותו באצבע ראתה שפחה על הים מה שלא ראו נביאים:
‘This is my God’ – He was revealed to them in His glory, and they saw and pointed to Him with their own finger. A maidservant at the [splitting of the] sea saw what the prophets did not see. (Rashi Shmot 15:2)
The splitting of the sea was not just a devastating blow for the Egyptians, nor was it exclusively a moment of salvation for the Jews. The Jews, as a Nation, saw a vision of God, a manifestation of His might. This was a moment of confirmation, a “pre-Revelation revelation”, as it were. The hand of God was clearly seen, as God appeared ready for battle as a “Man of war”, and they pointed to Heaven in awe:
ספר שמות פרק טו
(ג) ה’ אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה ה’ שְׁמוֹ:
God is the Master of war, God is His name. (Shmot 15:3)
This week’s parsha is therefore a conduit, a corridor of history, in which punishment is transformed into revelation. Cause and effect, God’s active involvement in human history, the unique relationship between God and His Chosen People all become clear in this crystallizing moment, as the Jewish People inch closer to Sinai.
The parsha begins…
(יז) וַיְהִי בְּשַׁלַּח פַּרְעֹה אֶת הָעָם וְלֹא נָחָם אֱלֹהִים דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים פֶּן יִנָּחֵם הָעָם בִּרְאֹתָם מִלְחָמָה וְשָׁבוּ מִצְרָיְמָה: (יח) וַיַּסֵּב אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָעָם דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּדְבָּר יַם סוּף וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם: (יט) וַיִּקַּח משֶׁה אֶת עַצְמוֹת יוֹסֵף עִמּוֹ כִּי הַשְׁבֵּעַ הִשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר פָּקֹד יִפְקֹד אֱלֹהִים אֶתְכֶם וְהַעֲלִיתֶם אֶת עַצְמֹתַי מִזֶּה אִתְּכֶם:
13:17 When Pharaoh let the people leave, God did not lead them via the Philistine land, although it was the shorter route. God's consideration was that if the people encountered armed resistance, they would lose heart and return to Egypt. 13:18 God therefore made the people take a roundabout path, by way of the desert to the Red Sea. And the Israelites were armed when they left Egypt. 13:19 Moshe took Yosef's remains with him, for Yosef had bound the Israelites by an oath: 'God will grant you special providence, and you must then bring my remains out of here with you.' (Shmot 13:17-19)
When the Jews start their journey, apparently they are not quite ready to go, for God takes them on a circuitous route, lest they see war and turn back to Egypt. Ironically, they leave armed; the Israelites thought they were ready for battle, but God knew better.[1]
Verse 19, though seemingly somewhat out of context, may in fact reflect upon the “armaments” with which the Jews were equipped: While the Children of Israel take up their primitive arms for protection, Moshe takes Yosef’s remains, which, as we shall see, were more likely the catalyst for the splitting of the sea.
The next two verses seem to foreshadow the giving of the Torah:
(כ) וַיִּסְעוּ מִסֻּכֹּת וַיַּחֲנוּ בְאֵתָם בִּקְצֵה הַמִּדְבָּר: (כא) וה’ הֹלֵךְ לִפְנֵיהֶם יוֹמָם בְּעַמּוּד עָנָן לַנְחֹתָם הַדֶּרֶךְ וְלַיְלָה בְּעַמּוּד אֵשׁ לְהָאִיר לָהֶם לָלֶכֶת יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה: (כב) לֹא יָמִישׁ עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן יוֹמָם וְעַמּוּד הָאֵשׁ לָיְלָה לִפְנֵי הָעָם:
13:20 [The Israelites] moved on from Sukkot, and they camped in Etam, at the edge of the desert. 13:21 God went before them by day with a pillar of cloud, to guide them along the way, and by night with a pillar of fire, providing them with light so they could travel day and night. 13:22 The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire at night never left [their position] in front of the people. (Shmot 13:20-22)
The connection between these verses and those surrounding the giving of the Torah is both symbolic and linguistic. First, the clouds hovering above remind us of the clouds that engulfed the mountain at the Revelation. Second, the word yamush (depart) used here is a word which is rarely used in Tanach, but more often than not is associated with Torah, [2] as in describing Yehoshua’s dedication to his master Moshe:
ספר שמות פרק לג
(ט) וְהָיָה כְּבֹא משֶׁה הָאֹהֱלָה יֵרֵד עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן וְעָמַד פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל וְדִבֶּר עִם משֶׁה: (י) וְרָאָה כָל הָעָם אֶת עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן עֹמֵד פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל וְקָם כָּל הָעָם וְהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ אִישׁ פֶּתַח אָהֳלוֹ: (יא) וְדִבֶּר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים כַּאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וְשָׁב אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה וּמְשָׁרֲתוֹ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן נַעַר לֹא יָמִישׁ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֹהֶל:
33:9 When Moshe went into the tent, the pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the tent's entrance, and [God] would speak to Moshe. 33:10 When the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the tent's entrance, the people would rise, and each one would bow down at the entrance of his tent. 33:11 God would speak to Moshe face to face, just as a person speaks to a close friend. [Moshe] would then return to the camp. But his aid, the young man, Joshua son of Nun, did not leave the tent. (Shmot 33:9-11)
This passage, in which we find both the symbol of the cloud and the expression of constant dedication, yamush, also includes elements that we see in the splitting of the sea, as well as elements we later find associated with the experience of Torah learning: Later in the parsha, after the revelation at the sea, after the song of joy and thanks Moshe and all the people sing to God, the Jewish People receive their first taste of Torah.
ספר שמות פרק טו
(כב) וַיַּסַּע משֶׁה אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל מִיַּם סוּף וַיֵּצְאוּ אֶל מִדְבַּר שׁוּר וַיֵּלְכוּ שְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים בַּמִּדְבָּר וְלֹא מָצְאוּ מָיִם: (כג) וַיָּבֹאוּ מָרָתָה וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לִשְׁתֹּת מַיִם מִמָּרָה כִּי מָרִים הֵם עַל כֵּן קָרָא שְׁמָהּ מָרָה: (כד) וַיִּלֹּנוּ הָעָם עַל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר מַה נִּשְׁתֶּה: (כה) וַיִּצְעַק אֶל ה’ וַיּוֹרֵהוּ ה’ עֵץ וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ אֶל הַמַּיִם וַיִּמְתְּקוּ הַמָּיִם שָׁם שָׂם לוֹ חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט וְשָׁם נִסָּהוּ:
15:22 Moshe led the Israelites away from the Red Sea, and they went out into the Shur Desert. They traveled for three days in the desert without finding any water. 15:23 Finally, they came to Marah, but they could not drink any water there. The water was bitter (marah), and that was why the place was called Marah. 15:24 The people complained to Moshe. 'What shall we drink?' they demanded. 15:25 [Moshe] cried out to God, and He instructed him [regarding] a certain tree. [Moshe] threw it into the water, and the water became drinkable. It was here that he was given law and statute, and here he was tested (uplifted). (Shmot 15:22-25)
רש"י על שמות פרק טו פסוק כה
(כה) שם שם לו - במרה נתן להם מקצת פרשיות של תורה שיתעסקו בהם שבת ופרה אדומה ודינין (סנהדרין מ):
Immediately following the splitting of the waters and the “Song of the Sea”, a national event occurred, which reverberates in our collective experience to this very day. The People of Israel receive Torah, and share a collective learning experience. At this juncture, the Jews have traveled three days’ distance from the site of their first revelation – the splitting of the sea – and they are thirsty. What they seek is more than physical sustenance. They beg for a continued revelation, an ongoing dialogue with God, and they are given certain Torah laws – hok u’mishpat. From that day forth, Jews do not allow an interval of three days to transpire between public readings of the Torah. This spiritual sustenance uplifted them, allowed them to face the trials and challenges that lay ahead.
This reading of the verse associates water with Torah. Yet the text remains somewhat impenetrable: The water they found was bitter, and became sweet after God’s instructions were followed. The Zohar draws a parallel to the bitter waters used to test woman suspected of infidelity. According to the Zohar, the very foundations of Jewish life had been shaken by the servitude in Egypt. A cloud of suspicion hung over the community, as husbands and wives suspected their spouses of sexual misconduct as a means of personal survival during the period of their slavery. The atmosphere of mistrust and guilt was paralyzing, embittering. At Marah, the bitter waters of the sotah ritual were administered to all of the people, and they emerged with a clean bill of spiritual health. What began as a ritual of blame and suspicion gave way to reconciliation, rapprochement, family and communal healing and unity. The water was sweetened, and the first precepts of Torah were received. Here, too, a spiritual corridor is created, moving the People from punishment to confirmation, from jealousy and distrust to a highly personal understanding of Torah law as the Word of God, from personal and communal estrangement to a unique perception of God’s involvement in personal and national history.
This transformation had to take place on their way to Sinai, for in order to receive the Torah, unity is required. When they stand at Sinai, the Jewish People stand as one. The core of this unity is the Jewish family. Suspicion and jealousy are contrary to the atmosphere needed for the Torah to be brought down from heaven.[3] The text points this out with a dramatic shift from the plural to the singular (which is imperceptible in translation):
שמות פרק יט
(ב) וַיִּסְעוּ מֵרְפִידִים וַיָּבֹאוּ מִדְבַּר סִינַי וַיַּחֲנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר וַיִּחַן שָׁם יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶגֶד הָהָר:
19:2 They departed from Rephidim and arrived in the Sinai Desert, camping in the wilderness. And Israel (literally, he – singular form) camped opposite the mountain. (Shmot 19:2)
רש"י על שמות פרק יט פסוק ב
ויחן שם ישראל - כאיש אחד בלב אחד אבל שאר כל החניות בתרעומות ובמחלוקת (מכילתא):
And Israel camped there: As one man with one heart. But in their other places of encampment, there was argument and discord. (Rashi Shmot 19:2)
Arriving at the foot of Mount Sinai, they have come a long way spiritually. They have experienced a revelation, they have received laws and statutes, and re-established the foundations of their personal and national relationships. All along this route, the terminology used to describe the processes they undergo is reminiscent of the Revelation at Sinai.
We should not overlook another telling use of the language of unity describing the pre-Sinai encampment: The Israelites were on their way out of Egypt, perhaps hoping and praying that they would never lay eyes on their abusive masters again. Then, it happens: Pharoh is closing in on them, with what looks like all of Egypt in pursuit:
ספר שמות פרק יד
(י) וּפַרְעֹה הִקְרִיב וַיִּשְׂאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת עֵינֵיהֶם וְהִנֵּה מִצְרַיִם נֹסֵעַ אַחֲרֵיהֶם וַיִּירְאוּ מְאֹד וַיִּצְעֲקוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל ה’:
14:10 And Pharoh drew near, and the Israelites looked up and saw Egypt riding after them, and they became very frightened and the Children of Israel screamed to God. (Shmot 14:10)
Once again, the translation of this verse does an injustice to the interplay of plural and singular: Pharoh is closing in on them and Egypt, referred to in the singular, is in hot pursuit. The text might more properly have read “the legions of Egypt” or “the chariots of Egypt”. Why refer to Egypt in the singular? Here, too, Rashi explains:
רש"י על שמות פרק יד פסוק י
נוסע אחריהם - בלב אחד כאיש אחד.
‘Riding after them’: With one heart as one man. (Rashi Shmot 14:10)
Rashi’s allusion is unmistakable: The glorious unity experienced by the Jews as a prerequisite to receiving the Torah - “As one man with one heart” - is here, too, among the Egyptian pursuers – but in reverse, “With one heart as one man”.[4] The Egyptians are unified by their hearts’ desires and unite to achieve that goal, while the Israelites are united as a People and are therefore willing to put aside their desires to maintain their unity. The encampment at the foot of Mount Sinai was unique, for here we became one.
An earlier encampment, between Egypt and the sea, also draws our attention:
ספר שמות פרק יד
(א) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר: (ב) דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיָשֻׁבוּ וְיַחֲנוּ לִפְנֵי פִּי הַחִירֹת בֵּין מִגְדֹּל וּבֵין הַיָּם לִפְנֵי בַּעַל צְפֹן נִכְחוֹ תַחֲנוּ עַל הַיָּם: (ג) וְאָמַר פַּרְעֹה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל נְבֻכִים הֵם בָּאָרֶץ סָגַר עֲלֵיהֶם הַמִּדְבָּר:
14:1 God spoke to Moshe, saying, 14:2 'Speak to the Israelites and tell them to turn back and camp before Pi haHirot (Freedom Valley?), between Migdol (Tower?) and the sea, facing Ba’al Zefon (Lord-of-the-North?). Camp opposite it, near the sea. 14:3 Pharaoh will then say to (i.e., regarding) the Israelites ‘They are lost in the area and trapped in the desert.’ (Shmot 14:1-3)
Here they are told to encamp at a place called “Pi haHirot”, which is most literally translated as “the mouth of freedom”. Rashi explains:
רש"י על שמות פרק יד פסוק ב
ויחנו לפני פי החירות - (מכילתא) הוא פיתום ועכשיו נקרא פי החירות על שם שנעשו בני חורין והם שני סלעים גבוהים זקופים והגיא שביניהם קרוי פי הסלעים:
[Pi haHirot] is Pitom, and at this point it is called Pi haHirot because here the Israelites became free men. They are two tall upright rocks, and the canyon between them is called “the mouth of the rocks.” (Rashi Shmot 14:2)
Rashi identifies the specific locale as Pitom, one of the areas built by the sweat of Jewish slaves and now known as ‘the mouth of freedom’, the place where the slaves became free. Passing through this place allowed the erstwhile slaves to achieve emotional or existential freedom, traveling as a free nation through a towering symbol of their servitude. Now, they would not build, would not obey a slave-master; now they could admire, reminisce, sigh - and move on.
The name given to this new-old landmark, Pi haHirot, is similar to the word used to describe the engraved writing on the Tablets given on Sinai, harut. When discussing the verses that describe the Tablets of Stone, the Talmud teaches that we should not read harut (engraved), rather herut (freedom), “for only one who is involved in Torah is truly free”.[5] The linguistic similarity in the case of the Tablets is clearly a Midrashic rendering of two words that sound similar despite their different root spellings (the root of the word for engraving is spelled with the letter ‘tet, whereas the root for freedom is spelled with a ‘taf). In our present case, the similarity is more firmly grounded –hirot and herut are spelled with the same letters, and are thus more closely related. We have alternative definition of this word, no other more convincing reading of this place-name: Here, as they pass through, they become free.[6]
There are several elements of the description of this place that are disturbing. Rashi describes the pi (“mouth”) as a formation of two tall upright rocks forming a canyon or natural outlet, a mouth. While this seems innocuous enough, Rashi’s comments on the verse do not end there. The next few words of the verse, “before Baal Tzafon” leave the reader with a more troubling image:
רש"י שמות פרק יד פסוק ב
לפני בעל צפן - הוא נשאר מכל אלהי מצרים, כדי להטעותן, שיאמרו קשה יראתן. ועליו פירש איוב (איוב יב כג) משגיא לגוים ויאבדם:
Before Baal Tzafon: For he was the last remaining god of Egypt, so as to mislead the Egyptians so that they should say their deity is durable. Regarding this (continued existence of Baal Tzafon), Job explained, “He leads nations astray and He destroys them.” (Rashi Shmot 14:2)
Pi haHirot is before Baal Tzafon – the last of Egypt’s various gods left standing. The Mechilta[7] examines the geological formation of this area in terms of the Egyptian pantheon: These rocks had a very specific connotation, appearing as male and female. The shrine to Egypt’s hold-out deity is a fertility symbol. And it is there that the Israelites find freedom.
It is no accident that the enslavement of the Jews took place in Egypt. Egypt was more than just a superpower in that era; it was the epicenter of immorality. Sinking to the “49th level of impurity” is not surprising in a place like Egypt. Time and again, the Torah enjoins us not to follow the practices of Egypt.[8] Egypt was a place of sexual depravity, as far back as our ancestors’ experience reaches: In our first visit to Egypt, Sarah is wrested from Avraham. In the next visit, the wife of Potiphar throws herself at Yosef; Talmudic tradition teaches that Potiphar himself had designs on Yosef[9] (which may explain why Potiphar’s wife was lonely and forlorn).
This was the crucible into which the Children of Israel were thrown. If the Jews are to make a difference in the world, they must make an impact in a society like Egypt. Alternatively, so long as Egypt prospers, the impact of Jews will be limited.
The Torah framework for the rejection of immorality is quite telling:
ספר ויקרא פרק יח
(ג) כְּמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר יְשַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ וּכְמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ וּבְחֻקֹּתֵיהֶם לֹא תֵלֵכוּ:
18:3 Do not follow the ways of Egypt where you once lived, nor of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow [any] of their customs. (Vayikra 18:3)
The ways and mores of Egypt and Canaan are to be rejected. This should come as no surprise, for these nations share a common denominator, in quite a literal sense. Egypt and Canaan are descendents of brothers, sons of Cham, another individual whose morals were corrupt.
The Sages offer details as to the specific types of behaviors included in the prohibition to reject Egyptian and Canaanite ways. The Sifra lists the corrupt behaviors common in Egypt: men would marry men, women would marry women, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, a woman would marry two men.[10] Significantly, all the examples are in the realm of sexuality. In fact, the verse which commands us not to follow the ways of Egypt is the introductory statement to the Torah chapter dealing with forbidden relationships. The Midrash[11] traces the roots of sexually deviant behavior back to the generation of the flood; eventually, the flood formed a huge mikvah[12] to purge and cleanse the world of these sins.
Egypt is corrupt. One manifestation of this corruption is the slave economy, the empire built on feet of clay. The despotism of Pharoh, the evil and inhumane treatment of the slaves and the genocidal decrees imposed upon a subservient population are economic expressions of deep-rooted corruption. Leaving Egypt means uprooting this immoral socio-economic construct. But there is another element to leaving Egypt: the Jews were extricated from a society built around sexual depravity.
Freedom came in stages: walking out of Egypt, walking through the sea, drinking the sweetened waters, standing at Sinai. Each of these steps freed them from another aspect of their servitude in Egypt, and each brought them one step closer to complete liberation.[13] Passing through Pi haHirot, facing the Egyptian god with its image of male and female, was another step toward freedom - freedom from the corrupt sexual mores of Egypt.
This observation brings us full circle, back to the beginning of the parsha. When they left Egypt, the Jews were “armed”; they thought they were ready for battle. In fact, they did not know what battle they would be fighting. They may not have been fully aware of the extent to which Egyptian morality had made inroads; they were unaware of the different facets of slavery from which they would have to be freed. God took them on a circuitous route, one that would walk them through various stages toward true liberation - knowing that they were not prepared for the battles they would face.
God continued to protect them until the penultimate scene of the parsha. Here, they once again find themselves without water, and experience a spiritual crisis of a different sort. They begin to question whether God is in their midst or not. On this backdrop, Amalek arrives on the scene.
ספר שמות פרק יז
וַיִּסְעוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמִּדְבַּר סִין לְמַסְעֵיהֶם עַל פִּי ד' וַיַּחֲנוּ בִּרְפִידִים וְאֵין מַיִם לִשְׁתֹּת הָעָם… וַיִּצְמָא שָׁם הָעָם לַמַּיִם וַיָּלֶן הָעָם עַל משֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר לָמָּה זֶּה הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם לְהָמִית אֹתִי וְאֶת בָּנַי וְאֶת מִקְנַי בַּצָּמָא...(ז) וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם מַסָּה וּמְרִיבָה עַל רִיב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְעַל נַסֹּתָם אֶת ד' לֵאמֹר הֲיֵשׁ ד’ בְּקִרְבֵּנוּ אִם אָיִן:(ח) וַיָּבֹא עֲמָלֵק וַיִּלָּחֶם עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּרְפִידִם:
And all the congregation of the People of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, in their journeys according to the commandment of God, and camped in Rephidim; and there was no water for the people to drink.3. And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moshe, and said, Why have you brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst? 7. And he called the name of the place Massah u’Merivah, because of the quarrel of the People of Israel, and because they tested God, saying, Is God among us, or not? 8. Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
In Moshe’s retrospective of this episode, in Devarim, we are offered further insight into the mindset of the people. The feeling that God might not be with them, which precipitates the attack, is projected onto Amalek:
ספר דברים פרק כה
(יז) זָכוֹר אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְךָ עֲמָלֵק בַּדֶּרֶךְ בְּצֵאתְכֶם מִמִּצְרָיִם: (יח) אֲשֶׁר קָרְךָ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כָּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחֲרֶיךָ וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים: (יט) וְהָיָה בְּהָנִיחַ ד’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ מִכָּל אֹיְבֶיךָ מִסָּבִיב בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר ד’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ תִּמְחֶה אֶת זֵכֶר עֲמָלֵק מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם לֹא תִּשְׁכָּח:
17. Remember what Amalek did to you by the way, when you came out of Egypt; 18. How he happened upon you by the way, and struck at your rear, all who were feeble behind you, when you were faint and weary; and did not fear God. 19. Therefore it shall be, when the Lord your God has given you rest from all your enemies around, in the land which the Lord your God gives you for an inheritance to possess, that you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget. (Dvarim 25:17-19)
Rashi offers three explanations of the word used to describe what exactly Amalek did: korcha is a singular word, appearing nowhere else in Tanakh, a verb which Rashi posits may be derived from three different roots. One is from the word kar, meaning cold: the Amalekites “cooled” the Jews off. After leaving Egypt and witnessing miracles, receiving their first dose of revelation, embarking on the path of Torah observance, the Jews were “red hot” with enthusiasm and zeal. The Amalekites cooled off their enthusiasm.
The second interpretation of korcha is related to happenstance, from the word mikreh: Amalek “happened” upon them. The Jews began to see the world as happenstance; they experienced a moment of doubt regarding God’s continued involvement in history. They felt God was not an active part of their day-to-day lives at this point; the world was one of mikreh –chance or coincidence.
The third interpretation is from the word keri, which means a seminal emission. This is based on a Midrash which teaches that Amalek’s attack included deviant sexual practice, which culminated in mutilation of the male organ. Although grotesque, this view articulates a more profound idea: The timing of Amalek’s attack was not random. The Jews stood at the cusp of Sinai. A new age of morality was about to descend on the world. Amalek, the descendent of Esav, rejected limits, rejected rules, rejected the very idea of self-restraint upon which morality is built. Circumcision, the ultimate symbol of self-control, was abhorrent to Amalek, and it was this symbol they attacked.
When the Israelites left Egypt, they armed themselves with primitive weapons, under the illusion that they were ready to fight. Moshe took something else, something that would provide victory in this type of war; something that represented morality and self-control. He took the remains of Yosef.
The Yalkut Shimoni teaches that the sea was split due to the merit of Yosef: When he ran out of the house of Potiphar, escaping the advances of his master’s wife, the term used is vayanas: he fled. This is precisely the phrase used to describe the splitting of the sea:[14]
בראשית פרק לט
(יב) וַתִּתְפְּשֵׂהוּ בְּבִגְדוֹ לֵאמֹר שִׁכְבָה עִמִּי וַיַּעֲזֹב בִּגְדוֹ בְּיָדָהּ וַיָּנָס וַיֵּצֵא הַחוּצָה:
She grabbed him by his cloak. 'Lie with me!' she pleaded. Leaving his cloak in her hand, he fled and ran outside. (Bereishit 39:12)
תהלים פרק קיד פסוק ג
הַיָּם רָאָה וַיָּנֹס הַיַּרְדֵּן יִסֹּב לְאָחוֹר:
The sea saw it, and fled; the Jordan was driven back. (Psalms 114:3.)
ילקוט שמעוני בראשית - פרק לט - רמז קמו
ותתפשהו בבגדו וג' וינס ויצא החוצה. קפץ בזכות אבות כד"א ויוצא אותו החוצה. שמעון איש קטרון אומר בזכות עצמותיו של יוסף קרע הים לפני ישראל שנאמר הים ראה וינוס בזכות וינס ויצא החוצה.
Just as Yosef fled the grasp of Mrs. Potiphar, the sea fled at the sight of Yosef’s remains, receding and exposing a dry path for the Jews. This is not some sort of magical response to the remains of Yosef. The impact Yosef’s spiritual identity still had on the community is what turned the tide – literally and figuratively. Yosef left an invaluable spiritual legacy behind: He displayed tremendous spiritual fortitude in the various unenviable situations in which he found himself after being sold into slavery. In fact, it was the sale of Yosef that brought the entire family to Egypt. Yosef’s life, then, was both a model of moral integrity and a challenge, a constant reminder of the dangers of divisiveness and disunity. Redemption from Egypt must necessarily address both of these elements: Salvation stems from recognition and internalization of Yosef’s moral heroism. At the same time, the sale of Yosef by his brothers must somehow be reversed. Unity must be achieved, healing the division in the community most acutely expressed by the sale of a brother.
Going into Egypt, the Jews were a family divided. The harsh image of the brothers breaking bread as Yosef screamed from the pit is one of the most tragic scenes in the Torah. The Passover seder, when we sit and break bread as a family and tell the story of the slavery and the Exodus, must be part of a Tikkun, rectification of the division within the community. At Pi Hahirot, Egypt was united, with one heart: they were united in passion, for this was a place that represented the passion of idolatry wrapped up with sexual licentiousness. The Jews will need to pass through this place in order to become free: They will need to be tested, just as Yosef was tested and as Yosef’s brothers were tested.
In fact, they are successful in both aspects of the test. They pass through Pi Hahirot and arrive at the sea, and nature is upended: The sea yields in the presence of Yosef, who withstood his own human nature in his extraordinary escape from temptation. Significantly, it is Moshe who carries Yosef out, invoking this great moral role-model. Moshe is from the tribe of Levi, who along with Shimon were Yosef’s greatest adversaries. This is an important step toward healing the rift, reuniting the family of Israel, and becoming whole.
Leaving Egypt was not easy. It required physical, emotional and religious transformation. The path through Pi Hahirot may at first glance have seemed a counter-intuitive choice: it might have empowered the Egyptians, for it was the focal point of their depravity. But this is precisely why this route was the most appropriate corridor, leading to our collective transformation: Here, the Jews saw the work of their own hands at Pitom, and as they crossed near the symbol of Egyptian depravity, in fact it was the Jews who were empowered. They became impervious to this idolatry. This was the path from Egypt to Sinai. It was paved with liberation, revelation, and transformation.
From Pi Hahirot the Jews crossed through the waters of Yam Suf, immersing in what would normally have been a mikva. But because of the route they had travelled to arrive there, the Jews had already achieved holiness and did not need the waters to purify them. Significantly, the events at the sea take place on the seventh day after they left Egypt, the day husband and wife are reunited after she immerses in the mikva. The Zohar[15] takes this idea even further, describing the seven week period between Pesach and Shavuot, between Exodus and Revelation, as a time of purification and preparation, linking the counting of the omer to the counting of a woman’s seven clean days before immersion and reuniting with her husband.
At Sinai, each family, each husband and wife, and consequently the community as a whole, stood, once again, “as one person with one heart”. They had corrected the interpersonal rift at Marah, and the tribal rift at the splitting of the sea. And at the foot of Mount Sinai, at that very moment of unity, Moshe relays a strange law: Husbands and wives are to separate in preparation for the Revelation. For Sinai will symbolize a new marriage, both between man and God, and between each couple. They will begin again, begin anew, in a union based on holiness. Through this act of separation, through this act of self-restraint, they all become holy – they all become like Yosef. They are all ready to receive the Torah, one unified nation, conceived in holiness – and completely free.
[1] Rashi offers two interpretations for chamushim: first, that they were armed, and second, that only one of five Israelites (one fifth of the total Jewish population) left Egypt.
[2] See Yehoshua 1:8
יהושע פרק א
(ח) לֹא יָמוּשׁ סֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה מִפִּיךָ וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה לְמַעַן תִּשְׁמֹר לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּכָל הַכָּתוּב בּוֹ כִּי אָז תַּצְלִיחַ אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאָז תַּשְׂכִּיל:
[3] It is interesting that when the Jews sin with the Golden Calf, they are made to drink the ground up pieces, which is also reminiscent of the bitter water ordeal. See Shmot 32:20
[4] See the Shem M’shmuel who notices the term and explains that the Egyptians were given this unity for a holy purpose, namely to induce the Israelites to repent and come closer to God.
ספר שם משמואל פרשת וישלח - שנת תרפ"א
ודומה לזה הגיד כ"ק אבי אדמו"ר זללה"ה בהא דכתיב על הים וישאו בנ"י את עיניהם והנה מצרים נוסע אחריהם וייראו מאד וגו', שלכאורה איננו מובן מה היתה היראה הלא כבר ראו אותות ומופתים למכביר. אך ברש"י והנה מצרים בלב אחד כאיש אחד, וידוע שזה לא נמצא בטומאה שהם ענפין מתפרדין, ע"כ כשראו שהמצרים הם בלב אחד כאיש אחד, חשבו שבודאי יש אצלם עתה כחות קדושה ומזה נתיראו, אך האומנם שהי' כן שכ"ז הי' מפאת כחות קדושה, אבל הי' זה כדי לקרב לבם של ישראל לתשובה ולא ח"ו לעזור למצרים, עכ"ד. וכן י"ל נמי בהא דנתירא יעקב, מפני שחשב שבודאי יש כחות קדושה עם עשו, ובאמת שגם זה כך הי' בשביל שנתאוה הקב"ה לתפלתו של יעקב ע"כ נשלחו לעשו כחות קדושה:
[5] See Talmud Bavli Eruvin 54a and Pirkie Avot 6:2
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף נד עמוד א
ואמר רבי (אליעזר) ]מסורת הש"ס: אלעזר]: מאי דכתיב )שמות ל"ב( חרות על הלחת - אלמלי לא נשתברו לוחות הראשונות לא נשתכחה תורה מישראל. רב אחא בר יעקב אמר: אין כל אומה ולשון שולטת בהן, שנאמר חרות אל תיקרי חרות אלא חירות:
משנה מסכת אבות פרק ו
ואומר והלוחות מעשה אלהים המה והמכתב מכתב אלהים הוא חרות על הלוחות אל תקרא חרות אלא חירות שאין לך בן חורין אלא מי שעוסק בתלמוד תורה וכל מי שעוסק בתורה תדיר הרי זה מתעלה שנאמר )במדבר כ"א י"ט( וממתנה נחליאל ומנחליאל במות:
[6] Certain mystical sources see the passage through the sea as a national rebirth experience, as they travel, physically and symbolically into a new stage of existence through a wondrous passageway between the waters.
[7] Midrashic sources describe the geographic formation of these rocks. See Mechilta Bshalach 5:1 for a description which evokes the image of the keruvim:
מכילתא פרשת בשלח פרשה א
וישובו ויחנו לפני פי החירות. מה חירות הללו לא היו משופעות אלא גדודיות ולא היו תרוטות אלא מוקפות ולא היו עגולות אלא מרובעות ולא היו מעשה אדם אלא מעשה שמים ועיני' היו להם לפותחו' כמן זכר וכמן נקיבה היו דברי רבי אליעזר. רבי יהושע אומר החירות מצד זה ומגדול מצד זה הים לפניה' ומצרים לאחריה'. דבר אחר פי החירות אין חירות אלא מקום חירותן של ישראל מקום מובחר להם מקום עבודה זרה שלהם. לשעבר היתה נקראת פיתום שנאמר שמות א' ויבן ערי מסכנות לפרעה את פיתום ואת רעמסס חזרו להם להקראת פי החירות שהיא מאחרת לעובדיה.
[8] Vayikra 18:3. See below.
[9] See Talmud Bavli Sotah 13b
תלמוד בבלי מסכת סוטה דף יג עמוד ב
ויקנהו פוטיפר סריס פרעה - אמר רב: שקנאו לעצמו. (בא גבריאל וסירסו) בא גבריאל ופירעו, מעיקרא כתיב פוטיפר, ולבסוף פוטיפרע.
[10] Sifra Acharei Mot section 8.
ספרא פרשת אחרי מות פרשתא ח
ח) אי כמעשה ארץ מצרים וכמעשה ארץ כנען לא תעשו יכול לא יבנו בניינים ולא יטעו נטיעות כמותם תלמוד לומר ובחוקותיהם לא תלכו לא אמרתי אלא בחוקים החקוקים להם ולאבותיהם ולאבות אבותיהם. ומה היו עושים האיש נושא לאיש והאשה לאשה האיש נושא אשה ובתה והאשה ניסת לשנים לכך אמר ובחוקותיהם לא תלכו:
[11] See Midrash Rabba Vayikra 23:9
מדרש רבה ויקרא פרשה כג פסקה ט
תני רבי ישמעאל כמעשה ארץ מצרים וכמעשה ארץ כנען לא תעשו וגו' ואם לאו אני ה' אלהיכם תני רבי חייא למה אני ה' כתיב שני פעמים אני הוא שפרעתי מדור המבול ומסדום וממצרים אני עתיד ליפרע ממי שהוא עושה כמעשיהם דור המבול נמחו מן העולם ע"י שהיו שטופין בזנות אמר רבי שמלאי כל מקום שאתה מוצא זנות אנדרלמוסיא באה לעולם והורגת טובים ורעים רב הונא בשם רבי יוסי אמר דור המבול לא נמחו מן העולם אלא ע"י שכתבו גומסיות לזכר ולנקבה ר' עזריה בשם רבי יהודה ברבי סימון וריב"ל בשם בר קפרא מצינו שעל הכל הקב"ה מאריך רוחו חוץ מן הזנות בלבד ואית ליה קריין סגיין שנא' (בראשית ו) ויהי כי החל האדם ויראו בני האלהים את בנות האדם וירא ה' כי רבה רעת האדם ויאמר ה' אמחה את האדם סדומיים ריב"ל בשם בר קפרא אמר כל אותו הלילה היה לוט עומד ומדבר עליהם סניגוריא כיון שבאו ואמרו לו (שם יט) איה האנשים ונדעה אותם בתשמיש מיד ויאמרו האנשים אל לוט עוד מי לך פה עד כאן היה לך פתחון פה ללמד עליהם סניגוריא אלא חתן בניך ובנותיך כי משחיתים אנחנו אני ה' אני הוא שנפרעתי משמשון ומאמנון ומזמרי ועתיד אני ליפרע ממי שיעשה כמעשיהם אני הוא ששלמתי ליוסף ליעל ולפלטי בן ליש אני עתיד לשלם שכר למי שעושה כמעשיהם
9. R. Ishmael taught: AFTER THE DOINGS OF THE LAND OF EGYPT... AND AFTER THE DOINGS OF THE LAND OF CANAAN... SHALL YE NOT DO, etc. (XVIII, 3), otherwise, I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD (ib. 4). R. Hiyya taught: Why is I AM THE LORD written twice? It implies: I am He who inflicted punishment upon the Generation of the Flood, upon Sodom, and upon Egypt, and I am the same who will inflict punishment upon any one who will act in accordance with their practices. The Generation of the Flood were blotted out from the world because they were steeped in whoredom. R. Samlai observed: In every instance where you find the prevalence of whoredom, an androlepsia1 comes upon the world and slays both good and bad. R. Huna says in the name of R. Jose: The Generation of the Flood were only blotted out of the world on account of their having written hymenean songs for sodomy. R. ‘Azariah in the name of R. Judah son of R. Simeon and R. Joshua b. Levi in the name of Bar Kappara say: We find that the Holy One, blessed be He, is long-suffering towards every offence except whoredom, and there are numerous texts to bear this out; as it says, And came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth... that the sons of God saw the daughters of men... and they took them wives... And the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great... And the Lord said: I will blot out man (Gen. VI, 1 ff). What of the Sodomites? R. Joshua son of Levi in the name of Bar Kappara said: During the whole of the night in question Lot was busy pleading on their behalf, but when they came and said to him: Where are the men... bring them out unto us, that we may know them (ib. XIX, 5)--’know them,’ that is to say, carnally--then forthwith The men said unto Lot: Hast thou here (poh) any besides? (ib. 12). By ’poh’ they as much as said: Until this moment you had a pretext (pithhon peh) for pleading in their favour, but now Son-in-law, and thy sons, and thy daughters... bring them out of the place; for we will destroy this place (ib. 13 f). ’I am the Lord’ implies: I am He who inflicted punishment upon Samson, Amnon, and Zimri, and who will in the inflict punishment upon any one who will act in accordance with their practices. I am He who requited Joseph, Jael, and Palti the son of Laish, and I will in the future pay reward to any one who acts in accordance with their deeds.
[12] The third place which was included to form an unholy trinity with the generation of the flood and Egypt, was Sodom was cleansed with lava and fire, not water. Generally there are connections, thematic and linguistic, between Sodom and Egypt.
[13] Rabbi Mordechai Yosef Leiner of Izbica in his Mei Shiloach Parshat Bshalach, suggests that the male/female image of Pi haHirot was an expression of the pagan perspective of freedom as a lack of law or structure. To the pagan mind, Pi haHirot was a place of freedom because there laws applied, sexually was not limited or regulated.
ספר מי השילוח - פרשת בשלח
וישובו ויחנו לפני פי החירות, ענין כח הטומאה של ע"ז הזאת היא קליפת זנות והיתה דמות זכר ונקבה, וע"כ קראו שמה פי החירות כי אצל האומות נראה שבמקום שיוכל להתפשט ולעשות כל תאות לבו שם הוא בן חורין, ע"כ נאמר ואמר פרעה נבוכים הם בארץ כו'. היינו כשיגיעו לפני ע"ז הלזו יהיה נראה שהם משועבדים מאחר שהם מוגדרים מאוד בזאת התאוה, אך באמת הוא להיפך שהם משועבדים לזה הדבר. שהרי מאחר שאין לבם ברשותם אשר השכל ימשול עליהם רק תאותם מושלת עליהם אין לך משעבוד גדול מזה:
[14] See Shem Mshmuel Bshalach 5675: Faith (emunah) is what causes the sea to be split, creating a parallel with the hands of Moshe, which are called emunah, in the defeat of Amalek.
ספר שם משמואל פרשת בשלח - שנת תרע"ה
ע"כ ויסב אלקים את העם דרך המדבר ים סוף, ואמצעות האמונה שהלכו אחריו למדבר בלי מזון ומחי', ואח"כ כששבו ויחנו לפני פי החירות ולא אמרו היאך נתקרב אל רודפינו כדי שלא לשבור את לב הטף והנשים אלא אמרו אין לנו אלא דברי בן עמרם, וכן על הים שנכנסו למים עד חוטמם, זה עצמו הי' מירוק לפגם השכל, במה שבטלו את שכלם לרצון הש"י, זה השלים מה שהי' חסר מפאת חוסר הזמן עד ד' מאות שנה, ונעשו ראויים למ"ת, ואלמלא העגל לא היו צריכין עוד לשום מירוק. אך אמונה זו לא כ"כ קלה היא ולא כל הרוצה ליטול את השם יבוא ויטול, אלא ע"י שהיו שומרי הברית, ובסוד (ישעי' ס') ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ והבן. וזה ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו, וזהו שבמדרש (פ' כ"ב) בזכות האמונה נקרע להם הים, ועוד אמרו בשביל ארונו של יוסף נקרע הים כי זה תלוי בזה:
[15] Zohar Vayikra 97b
Just as a woman then has to count seven days, so now God bade the Israelites count days for purity. They were to count for themselves, so as to be purified with supernal holy waters, and then to be attached to the King and to receive the Torah. The woman had to count seven days, the people seven weeks. Why seven weeks? That they might be worthy to be cleansed by the waters of that stream which is called living waters, and from which issue seven Sabbaths. When Israel drew near to Mount Sinai, that dew that descends from the supernal Point came down in its fullness and purified them so that their filth left them and they became attached to the Holy King and the Community of Israel and received the Torah, as we have explained.
© 2009 Rabbi Ari Kahn
The Eleventh Plague
With the ten plagues behind them, the Jews leave Egypt and head to Mount Sinai. In fact, Sinai had been on the itinerary from the outset of the Exodus story; a critical stop on the way to the Promised Land, Mount Sinai was one of the objectives of the Exodus.
שמות פרק ג
(ח) וָאֵרֵד לְהַצִּילוֹ מִיַּד מִצְרַיִם וּלְהַעֲלֹתוֹ מִן הָאָרֶץ הַהִוא אֶל אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה וּרְחָבָה אֶל אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבָשׁ אֶל מְקוֹם הַכְּנַעֲנִי וְהַחִתִּי וְהָאֱמֹרִי וְהַפְּרִזִּי וְהַחִוִּי וְהַיְבוּסִי:…(יב) וַיֹּאמֶר כִּי אֶהְיֶה עִמָּךְ וְזֶה לְּךָ הָאוֹת כִּי אָנֹכִי שְׁלַחְתִּיךָ בְּהוֹצִיאֲךָ אֶת הָעָם מִמִּצְרַיִם תַּעַבְדוּן אֶת הָאֱלֹהִים עַל הָהָר הַזֶּה:
(Shmot) 3:8 I will come down (or, I am descending) to rescue them from the grip of Egypt and bring them up out of that land to a good, spacious land, to a land flowing with milk and honey, the territory of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Yevusites….3:12 'Because I will be with you,' replied [God]. 'And this will be the sign that I have sent you: When you take the People out of Egypt you will all then serve God on this mountain.'
When God first spoke to Moshe and empowered him to act as His messenger, the events that would unfold at Sinai were foretold. But after Pharoh relents, and before they reach Sinai, another major event occurs, an event whose nature is unclear. How are we to understand the splitting of the sea? Each step they take from the moment they are freed leads them both one step further from Egypt and one step closer to the Revelation at Sinai. How, then, should we view the events at the sea? Is this an introduction to the Sinai experience or the final chapter of leaving Egypt?
While the topic of this week’s parsha is a direct continuation of the preceding chapter, there is nonetheless a shift. This ambiguity requires the modern reader to shed some rather ingrained preconceptions: At no time, in no way does the Torah state that there will be ten plagues. This is a man-made categorization. We are so accustomed to seeing ten plagues, that the splitting of the sea is automatically assigned a category of its own, sui generis, unique and separate. The events of Parshat B’shalach are assumed to be distinct from those of the preceding parsha, apart from the ten plagues that are organically connected to leaving Egypt. But why? Why is the splitting of the sea seen as a separate event and not as the eleventh plague?
It may be instructive to take a step back and view the larger framework: The events at Sinai are conceptually divided between two elements: the Revelation itself, and the content of that Revelation - the experience of seeing the heavens open and hearing the voice of God, on the one hand, and the concepts which were imparted through that experience, on the other. Similarly, at the splitting of the sea we may discern two distinct elements. The Egyptians experienced punishment on a scale previously unknown to them, while the Israelites experienced revelation:
ספר שמות פרק טו
(ב) עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ וַיְהִי לִי לִישׁוּעָה זֶה אֵלִי וְאַנְוֵהוּ אֱלֹהֵי אָבִי וַאֲרֹמֲמֶנְהוּ:
My strength and song is God And this is my deliverance; This is my God, I will enshrine Him, My father's God and I will exalt Him. (Shmot 15:2)
Rashi explains:
רש"י על שמות פרק טו פסוק ב
זה אלי - בכבודו נגלה עליהם והיו מראין אותו באצבע ראתה שפחה על הים מה שלא ראו נביאים:
‘This is my God’ – He was revealed to them in His glory, and they saw and pointed to Him with their own finger. A maidservant at the [splitting of the] sea saw what the prophets did not see. (Rashi Shmot 15:2)
The splitting of the sea was not just a devastating blow for the Egyptians, nor was it exclusively a moment of salvation for the Jews. The Jews, as a Nation, saw a vision of God, a manifestation of His might. This was a moment of confirmation, a “pre-Revelation revelation”, as it were. The hand of God was clearly seen, as God appeared ready for battle as a “Man of war”, and they pointed to Heaven in awe:
ספר שמות פרק טו
(ג) ה’ אִישׁ מִלְחָמָה ה’ שְׁמוֹ:
God is the Master of war, God is His name. (Shmot 15:3)
This week’s parsha is therefore a conduit, a corridor of history, in which punishment is transformed into revelation. Cause and effect, God’s active involvement in human history, the unique relationship between God and His Chosen People all become clear in this crystallizing moment, as the Jewish People inch closer to Sinai.
The parsha begins…
(יז) וַיְהִי בְּשַׁלַּח פַּרְעֹה אֶת הָעָם וְלֹא נָחָם אֱלֹהִים דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ פְּלִשְׁתִּים כִּי קָרוֹב הוּא כִּי אָמַר אֱלֹהִים פֶּן יִנָּחֵם הָעָם בִּרְאֹתָם מִלְחָמָה וְשָׁבוּ מִצְרָיְמָה: (יח) וַיַּסֵּב אֱלֹהִים אֶת הָעָם דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּדְבָּר יַם סוּף וַחֲמֻשִׁים עָלוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם: (יט) וַיִּקַּח משֶׁה אֶת עַצְמוֹת יוֹסֵף עִמּוֹ כִּי הַשְׁבֵּעַ הִשְׁבִּיעַ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר פָּקֹד יִפְקֹד אֱלֹהִים אֶתְכֶם וְהַעֲלִיתֶם אֶת עַצְמֹתַי מִזֶּה אִתְּכֶם:
13:17 When Pharaoh let the people leave, God did not lead them via the Philistine land, although it was the shorter route. God's consideration was that if the people encountered armed resistance, they would lose heart and return to Egypt. 13:18 God therefore made the people take a roundabout path, by way of the desert to the Red Sea. And the Israelites were armed when they left Egypt. 13:19 Moshe took Yosef's remains with him, for Yosef had bound the Israelites by an oath: 'God will grant you special providence, and you must then bring my remains out of here with you.' (Shmot 13:17-19)
When the Jews start their journey, apparently they are not quite ready to go, for God takes them on a circuitous route, lest they see war and turn back to Egypt. Ironically, they leave armed; the Israelites thought they were ready for battle, but God knew better.[1]
Verse 19, though seemingly somewhat out of context, may in fact reflect upon the “armaments” with which the Jews were equipped: While the Children of Israel take up their primitive arms for protection, Moshe takes Yosef’s remains, which, as we shall see, were more likely the catalyst for the splitting of the sea.
The next two verses seem to foreshadow the giving of the Torah:
(כ) וַיִּסְעוּ מִסֻּכֹּת וַיַּחֲנוּ בְאֵתָם בִּקְצֵה הַמִּדְבָּר: (כא) וה’ הֹלֵךְ לִפְנֵיהֶם יוֹמָם בְּעַמּוּד עָנָן לַנְחֹתָם הַדֶּרֶךְ וְלַיְלָה בְּעַמּוּד אֵשׁ לְהָאִיר לָהֶם לָלֶכֶת יוֹמָם וָלָיְלָה: (כב) לֹא יָמִישׁ עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן יוֹמָם וְעַמּוּד הָאֵשׁ לָיְלָה לִפְנֵי הָעָם:
13:20 [The Israelites] moved on from Sukkot, and they camped in Etam, at the edge of the desert. 13:21 God went before them by day with a pillar of cloud, to guide them along the way, and by night with a pillar of fire, providing them with light so they could travel day and night. 13:22 The pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire at night never left [their position] in front of the people. (Shmot 13:20-22)
The connection between these verses and those surrounding the giving of the Torah is both symbolic and linguistic. First, the clouds hovering above remind us of the clouds that engulfed the mountain at the Revelation. Second, the word yamush (depart) used here is a word which is rarely used in Tanach, but more often than not is associated with Torah, [2] as in describing Yehoshua’s dedication to his master Moshe:
ספר שמות פרק לג
(ט) וְהָיָה כְּבֹא משֶׁה הָאֹהֱלָה יֵרֵד עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן וְעָמַד פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל וְדִבֶּר עִם משֶׁה: (י) וְרָאָה כָל הָעָם אֶת עַמּוּד הֶעָנָן עֹמֵד פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל וְקָם כָּל הָעָם וְהִשְׁתַּחֲווּ אִישׁ פֶּתַח אָהֳלוֹ: (יא) וְדִבֶּר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה פָּנִים אֶל פָּנִים כַּאֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר אִישׁ אֶל רֵעֵהוּ וְשָׁב אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה וּמְשָׁרֲתוֹ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן נַעַר לֹא יָמִישׁ מִתּוֹךְ הָאֹהֶל:
33:9 When Moshe went into the tent, the pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the tent's entrance, and [God] would speak to Moshe. 33:10 When the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the tent's entrance, the people would rise, and each one would bow down at the entrance of his tent. 33:11 God would speak to Moshe face to face, just as a person speaks to a close friend. [Moshe] would then return to the camp. But his aid, the young man, Joshua son of Nun, did not leave the tent. (Shmot 33:9-11)
This passage, in which we find both the symbol of the cloud and the expression of constant dedication, yamush, also includes elements that we see in the splitting of the sea, as well as elements we later find associated with the experience of Torah learning: Later in the parsha, after the revelation at the sea, after the song of joy and thanks Moshe and all the people sing to God, the Jewish People receive their first taste of Torah.
ספר שמות פרק טו
(כב) וַיַּסַּע משֶׁה אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל מִיַּם סוּף וַיֵּצְאוּ אֶל מִדְבַּר שׁוּר וַיֵּלְכוּ שְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים בַּמִּדְבָּר וְלֹא מָצְאוּ מָיִם: (כג) וַיָּבֹאוּ מָרָתָה וְלֹא יָכְלוּ לִשְׁתֹּת מַיִם מִמָּרָה כִּי מָרִים הֵם עַל כֵּן קָרָא שְׁמָהּ מָרָה: (כד) וַיִּלֹּנוּ הָעָם עַל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר מַה נִּשְׁתֶּה: (כה) וַיִּצְעַק אֶל ה’ וַיּוֹרֵהוּ ה’ עֵץ וַיַּשְׁלֵךְ אֶל הַמַּיִם וַיִּמְתְּקוּ הַמָּיִם שָׁם שָׂם לוֹ חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט וְשָׁם נִסָּהוּ:
15:22 Moshe led the Israelites away from the Red Sea, and they went out into the Shur Desert. They traveled for three days in the desert without finding any water. 15:23 Finally, they came to Marah, but they could not drink any water there. The water was bitter (marah), and that was why the place was called Marah. 15:24 The people complained to Moshe. 'What shall we drink?' they demanded. 15:25 [Moshe] cried out to God, and He instructed him [regarding] a certain tree. [Moshe] threw it into the water, and the water became drinkable. It was here that he was given law and statute, and here he was tested (uplifted). (Shmot 15:22-25)
רש"י על שמות פרק טו פסוק כה
(כה) שם שם לו - במרה נתן להם מקצת פרשיות של תורה שיתעסקו בהם שבת ופרה אדומה ודינין (סנהדרין מ):
Immediately following the splitting of the waters and the “Song of the Sea”, a national event occurred, which reverberates in our collective experience to this very day. The People of Israel receive Torah, and share a collective learning experience. At this juncture, the Jews have traveled three days’ distance from the site of their first revelation – the splitting of the sea – and they are thirsty. What they seek is more than physical sustenance. They beg for a continued revelation, an ongoing dialogue with God, and they are given certain Torah laws – hok u’mishpat. From that day forth, Jews do not allow an interval of three days to transpire between public readings of the Torah. This spiritual sustenance uplifted them, allowed them to face the trials and challenges that lay ahead.
This reading of the verse associates water with Torah. Yet the text remains somewhat impenetrable: The water they found was bitter, and became sweet after God’s instructions were followed. The Zohar draws a parallel to the bitter waters used to test woman suspected of infidelity. According to the Zohar, the very foundations of Jewish life had been shaken by the servitude in Egypt. A cloud of suspicion hung over the community, as husbands and wives suspected their spouses of sexual misconduct as a means of personal survival during the period of their slavery. The atmosphere of mistrust and guilt was paralyzing, embittering. At Marah, the bitter waters of the sotah ritual were administered to all of the people, and they emerged with a clean bill of spiritual health. What began as a ritual of blame and suspicion gave way to reconciliation, rapprochement, family and communal healing and unity. The water was sweetened, and the first precepts of Torah were received. Here, too, a spiritual corridor is created, moving the People from punishment to confirmation, from jealousy and distrust to a highly personal understanding of Torah law as the Word of God, from personal and communal estrangement to a unique perception of God’s involvement in personal and national history.
This transformation had to take place on their way to Sinai, for in order to receive the Torah, unity is required. When they stand at Sinai, the Jewish People stand as one. The core of this unity is the Jewish family. Suspicion and jealousy are contrary to the atmosphere needed for the Torah to be brought down from heaven.[3] The text points this out with a dramatic shift from the plural to the singular (which is imperceptible in translation):
שמות פרק יט
(ב) וַיִּסְעוּ מֵרְפִידִים וַיָּבֹאוּ מִדְבַּר סִינַי וַיַּחֲנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר וַיִּחַן שָׁם יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶגֶד הָהָר:
19:2 They departed from Rephidim and arrived in the Sinai Desert, camping in the wilderness. And Israel (literally, he – singular form) camped opposite the mountain. (Shmot 19:2)
רש"י על שמות פרק יט פסוק ב
ויחן שם ישראל - כאיש אחד בלב אחד אבל שאר כל החניות בתרעומות ובמחלוקת (מכילתא):
And Israel camped there: As one man with one heart. But in their other places of encampment, there was argument and discord. (Rashi Shmot 19:2)
Arriving at the foot of Mount Sinai, they have come a long way spiritually. They have experienced a revelation, they have received laws and statutes, and re-established the foundations of their personal and national relationships. All along this route, the terminology used to describe the processes they undergo is reminiscent of the Revelation at Sinai.
We should not overlook another telling use of the language of unity describing the pre-Sinai encampment: The Israelites were on their way out of Egypt, perhaps hoping and praying that they would never lay eyes on their abusive masters again. Then, it happens: Pharoh is closing in on them, with what looks like all of Egypt in pursuit:
ספר שמות פרק יד
(י) וּפַרְעֹה הִקְרִיב וַיִּשְׂאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת עֵינֵיהֶם וְהִנֵּה מִצְרַיִם נֹסֵעַ אַחֲרֵיהֶם וַיִּירְאוּ מְאֹד וַיִּצְעֲקוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל ה’:
14:10 And Pharoh drew near, and the Israelites looked up and saw Egypt riding after them, and they became very frightened and the Children of Israel screamed to God. (Shmot 14:10)
Once again, the translation of this verse does an injustice to the interplay of plural and singular: Pharoh is closing in on them and Egypt, referred to in the singular, is in hot pursuit. The text might more properly have read “the legions of Egypt” or “the chariots of Egypt”. Why refer to Egypt in the singular? Here, too, Rashi explains:
רש"י על שמות פרק יד פסוק י
נוסע אחריהם - בלב אחד כאיש אחד.
‘Riding after them’: With one heart as one man. (Rashi Shmot 14:10)
Rashi’s allusion is unmistakable: The glorious unity experienced by the Jews as a prerequisite to receiving the Torah - “As one man with one heart” - is here, too, among the Egyptian pursuers – but in reverse, “With one heart as one man”.[4] The Egyptians are unified by their hearts’ desires and unite to achieve that goal, while the Israelites are united as a People and are therefore willing to put aside their desires to maintain their unity. The encampment at the foot of Mount Sinai was unique, for here we became one.
An earlier encampment, between Egypt and the sea, also draws our attention:
ספר שמות פרק יד
(א) וַיְדַבֵּר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה לֵּאמֹר: (ב) דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְיָשֻׁבוּ וְיַחֲנוּ לִפְנֵי פִּי הַחִירֹת בֵּין מִגְדֹּל וּבֵין הַיָּם לִפְנֵי בַּעַל צְפֹן נִכְחוֹ תַחֲנוּ עַל הַיָּם: (ג) וְאָמַר פַּרְעֹה לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל נְבֻכִים הֵם בָּאָרֶץ סָגַר עֲלֵיהֶם הַמִּדְבָּר:
14:1 God spoke to Moshe, saying, 14:2 'Speak to the Israelites and tell them to turn back and camp before Pi haHirot (Freedom Valley?), between Migdol (Tower?) and the sea, facing Ba’al Zefon (Lord-of-the-North?). Camp opposite it, near the sea. 14:3 Pharaoh will then say to (i.e., regarding) the Israelites ‘They are lost in the area and trapped in the desert.’ (Shmot 14:1-3)
Here they are told to encamp at a place called “Pi haHirot”, which is most literally translated as “the mouth of freedom”. Rashi explains:
רש"י על שמות פרק יד פסוק ב
ויחנו לפני פי החירות - (מכילתא) הוא פיתום ועכשיו נקרא פי החירות על שם שנעשו בני חורין והם שני סלעים גבוהים זקופים והגיא שביניהם קרוי פי הסלעים:
[Pi haHirot] is Pitom, and at this point it is called Pi haHirot because here the Israelites became free men. They are two tall upright rocks, and the canyon between them is called “the mouth of the rocks.” (Rashi Shmot 14:2)
Rashi identifies the specific locale as Pitom, one of the areas built by the sweat of Jewish slaves and now known as ‘the mouth of freedom’, the place where the slaves became free. Passing through this place allowed the erstwhile slaves to achieve emotional or existential freedom, traveling as a free nation through a towering symbol of their servitude. Now, they would not build, would not obey a slave-master; now they could admire, reminisce, sigh - and move on.
The name given to this new-old landmark, Pi haHirot, is similar to the word used to describe the engraved writing on the Tablets given on Sinai, harut. When discussing the verses that describe the Tablets of Stone, the Talmud teaches that we should not read harut (engraved), rather herut (freedom), “for only one who is involved in Torah is truly free”.[5] The linguistic similarity in the case of the Tablets is clearly a Midrashic rendering of two words that sound similar despite their different root spellings (the root of the word for engraving is spelled with the letter ‘tet, whereas the root for freedom is spelled with a ‘taf). In our present case, the similarity is more firmly grounded –hirot and herut are spelled with the same letters, and are thus more closely related. We have alternative definition of this word, no other more convincing reading of this place-name: Here, as they pass through, they become free.[6]
There are several elements of the description of this place that are disturbing. Rashi describes the pi (“mouth”) as a formation of two tall upright rocks forming a canyon or natural outlet, a mouth. While this seems innocuous enough, Rashi’s comments on the verse do not end there. The next few words of the verse, “before Baal Tzafon” leave the reader with a more troubling image:
רש"י שמות פרק יד פסוק ב
לפני בעל צפן - הוא נשאר מכל אלהי מצרים, כדי להטעותן, שיאמרו קשה יראתן. ועליו פירש איוב (איוב יב כג) משגיא לגוים ויאבדם:
Before Baal Tzafon: For he was the last remaining god of Egypt, so as to mislead the Egyptians so that they should say their deity is durable. Regarding this (continued existence of Baal Tzafon), Job explained, “He leads nations astray and He destroys them.” (Rashi Shmot 14:2)
Pi haHirot is before Baal Tzafon – the last of Egypt’s various gods left standing. The Mechilta[7] examines the geological formation of this area in terms of the Egyptian pantheon: These rocks had a very specific connotation, appearing as male and female. The shrine to Egypt’s hold-out deity is a fertility symbol. And it is there that the Israelites find freedom.
It is no accident that the enslavement of the Jews took place in Egypt. Egypt was more than just a superpower in that era; it was the epicenter of immorality. Sinking to the “49th level of impurity” is not surprising in a place like Egypt. Time and again, the Torah enjoins us not to follow the practices of Egypt.[8] Egypt was a place of sexual depravity, as far back as our ancestors’ experience reaches: In our first visit to Egypt, Sarah is wrested from Avraham. In the next visit, the wife of Potiphar throws herself at Yosef; Talmudic tradition teaches that Potiphar himself had designs on Yosef[9] (which may explain why Potiphar’s wife was lonely and forlorn).
This was the crucible into which the Children of Israel were thrown. If the Jews are to make a difference in the world, they must make an impact in a society like Egypt. Alternatively, so long as Egypt prospers, the impact of Jews will be limited.
The Torah framework for the rejection of immorality is quite telling:
ספר ויקרא פרק יח
(ג) כְּמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר יְשַׁבְתֶּם בָּהּ לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ וּכְמַעֲשֵׂה אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מֵבִיא אֶתְכֶם שָׁמָּה לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ וּבְחֻקֹּתֵיהֶם לֹא תֵלֵכוּ:
18:3 Do not follow the ways of Egypt where you once lived, nor of Canaan, where I am bringing you. Do not follow [any] of their customs. (Vayikra 18:3)
The ways and mores of Egypt and Canaan are to be rejected. This should come as no surprise, for these nations share a common denominator, in quite a literal sense. Egypt and Canaan are descendents of brothers, sons of Cham, another individual whose morals were corrupt.
The Sages offer details as to the specific types of behaviors included in the prohibition to reject Egyptian and Canaanite ways. The Sifra lists the corrupt behaviors common in Egypt: men would marry men, women would marry women, a man would marry a woman and her daughter, a woman would marry two men.[10] Significantly, all the examples are in the realm of sexuality. In fact, the verse which commands us not to follow the ways of Egypt is the introductory statement to the Torah chapter dealing with forbidden relationships. The Midrash[11] traces the roots of sexually deviant behavior back to the generation of the flood; eventually, the flood formed a huge mikvah[12] to purge and cleanse the world of these sins.
Egypt is corrupt. One manifestation of this corruption is the slave economy, the empire built on feet of clay. The despotism of Pharoh, the evil and inhumane treatment of the slaves and the genocidal decrees imposed upon a subservient population are economic expressions of deep-rooted corruption. Leaving Egypt means uprooting this immoral socio-economic construct. But there is another element to leaving Egypt: the Jews were extricated from a society built around sexual depravity.
Freedom came in stages: walking out of Egypt, walking through the sea, drinking the sweetened waters, standing at Sinai. Each of these steps freed them from another aspect of their servitude in Egypt, and each brought them one step closer to complete liberation.[13] Passing through Pi haHirot, facing the Egyptian god with its image of male and female, was another step toward freedom - freedom from the corrupt sexual mores of Egypt.
This observation brings us full circle, back to the beginning of the parsha. When they left Egypt, the Jews were “armed”; they thought they were ready for battle. In fact, they did not know what battle they would be fighting. They may not have been fully aware of the extent to which Egyptian morality had made inroads; they were unaware of the different facets of slavery from which they would have to be freed. God took them on a circuitous route, one that would walk them through various stages toward true liberation - knowing that they were not prepared for the battles they would face.
God continued to protect them until the penultimate scene of the parsha. Here, they once again find themselves without water, and experience a spiritual crisis of a different sort. They begin to question whether God is in their midst or not. On this backdrop, Amalek arrives on the scene.
ספר שמות פרק יז
וַיִּסְעוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמִּדְבַּר סִין לְמַסְעֵיהֶם עַל פִּי ד' וַיַּחֲנוּ בִּרְפִידִים וְאֵין מַיִם לִשְׁתֹּת הָעָם… וַיִּצְמָא שָׁם הָעָם לַמַּיִם וַיָּלֶן הָעָם עַל משֶׁה וַיֹּאמֶר לָמָּה זֶּה הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מִמִּצְרַיִם לְהָמִית אֹתִי וְאֶת בָּנַי וְאֶת מִקְנַי בַּצָּמָא...(ז) וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם מַסָּה וּמְרִיבָה עַל רִיב בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְעַל נַסֹּתָם אֶת ד' לֵאמֹר הֲיֵשׁ ד’ בְּקִרְבֵּנוּ אִם אָיִן:(ח) וַיָּבֹא עֲמָלֵק וַיִּלָּחֶם עִם יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּרְפִידִם:
And all the congregation of the People of Israel journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, in their journeys according to the commandment of God, and camped in Rephidim; and there was no water for the people to drink.3. And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moshe, and said, Why have you brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst? 7. And he called the name of the place Massah u’Merivah, because of the quarrel of the People of Israel, and because they tested God, saying, Is God among us, or not? 8. Then came Amalek, and fought with Israel in Rephidim.
In Moshe’s retrospective of this episode, in Devarim, we are offered further insight into the mindset of the people. The feeling that God might not be with them, which precipitates the attack, is projected onto Amalek:
ספר דברים פרק כה
(יז) זָכוֹר אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְךָ עֲמָלֵק בַּדֶּרֶךְ בְּצֵאתְכֶם מִמִּצְרָיִם: (יח) אֲשֶׁר קָרְךָ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כָּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחֲרֶיךָ וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים: (יט) וְהָיָה בְּהָנִיחַ ד’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ מִכָּל אֹיְבֶיךָ מִסָּבִיב בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר ד’ אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ תִּמְחֶה אֶת זֵכֶר עֲמָלֵק מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם לֹא תִּשְׁכָּח:
17. Remember what Amalek did to you by the way, when you came out of Egypt; 18. How he happened upon you by the way, and struck at your rear, all who were feeble behind you, when you were faint and weary; and did not fear God. 19. Therefore it shall be, when the Lord your God has given you rest from all your enemies around, in the land which the Lord your God gives you for an inheritance to possess, that you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; you shall not forget. (Dvarim 25:17-19)
Rashi offers three explanations of the word used to describe what exactly Amalek did: korcha is a singular word, appearing nowhere else in Tanakh, a verb which Rashi posits may be derived from three different roots. One is from the word kar, meaning cold: the Amalekites “cooled” the Jews off. After leaving Egypt and witnessing miracles, receiving their first dose of revelation, embarking on the path of Torah observance, the Jews were “red hot” with enthusiasm and zeal. The Amalekites cooled off their enthusiasm.
The second interpretation of korcha is related to happenstance, from the word mikreh: Amalek “happened” upon them. The Jews began to see the world as happenstance; they experienced a moment of doubt regarding God’s continued involvement in history. They felt God was not an active part of their day-to-day lives at this point; the world was one of mikreh –chance or coincidence.
The third interpretation is from the word keri, which means a seminal emission. This is based on a Midrash which teaches that Amalek’s attack included deviant sexual practice, which culminated in mutilation of the male organ. Although grotesque, this view articulates a more profound idea: The timing of Amalek’s attack was not random. The Jews stood at the cusp of Sinai. A new age of morality was about to descend on the world. Amalek, the descendent of Esav, rejected limits, rejected rules, rejected the very idea of self-restraint upon which morality is built. Circumcision, the ultimate symbol of self-control, was abhorrent to Amalek, and it was this symbol they attacked.
When the Israelites left Egypt, they armed themselves with primitive weapons, under the illusion that they were ready to fight. Moshe took something else, something that would provide victory in this type of war; something that represented morality and self-control. He took the remains of Yosef.
The Yalkut Shimoni teaches that the sea was split due to the merit of Yosef: When he ran out of the house of Potiphar, escaping the advances of his master’s wife, the term used is vayanas: he fled. This is precisely the phrase used to describe the splitting of the sea:[14]
בראשית פרק לט
(יב) וַתִּתְפְּשֵׂהוּ בְּבִגְדוֹ לֵאמֹר שִׁכְבָה עִמִּי וַיַּעֲזֹב בִּגְדוֹ בְּיָדָהּ וַיָּנָס וַיֵּצֵא הַחוּצָה:
She grabbed him by his cloak. 'Lie with me!' she pleaded. Leaving his cloak in her hand, he fled and ran outside. (Bereishit 39:12)
תהלים פרק קיד פסוק ג
הַיָּם רָאָה וַיָּנֹס הַיַּרְדֵּן יִסֹּב לְאָחוֹר:
The sea saw it, and fled; the Jordan was driven back. (Psalms 114:3.)
ילקוט שמעוני בראשית - פרק לט - רמז קמו
ותתפשהו בבגדו וג' וינס ויצא החוצה. קפץ בזכות אבות כד"א ויוצא אותו החוצה. שמעון איש קטרון אומר בזכות עצמותיו של יוסף קרע הים לפני ישראל שנאמר הים ראה וינוס בזכות וינס ויצא החוצה.
Just as Yosef fled the grasp of Mrs. Potiphar, the sea fled at the sight of Yosef’s remains, receding and exposing a dry path for the Jews. This is not some sort of magical response to the remains of Yosef. The impact Yosef’s spiritual identity still had on the community is what turned the tide – literally and figuratively. Yosef left an invaluable spiritual legacy behind: He displayed tremendous spiritual fortitude in the various unenviable situations in which he found himself after being sold into slavery. In fact, it was the sale of Yosef that brought the entire family to Egypt. Yosef’s life, then, was both a model of moral integrity and a challenge, a constant reminder of the dangers of divisiveness and disunity. Redemption from Egypt must necessarily address both of these elements: Salvation stems from recognition and internalization of Yosef’s moral heroism. At the same time, the sale of Yosef by his brothers must somehow be reversed. Unity must be achieved, healing the division in the community most acutely expressed by the sale of a brother.
Going into Egypt, the Jews were a family divided. The harsh image of the brothers breaking bread as Yosef screamed from the pit is one of the most tragic scenes in the Torah. The Passover seder, when we sit and break bread as a family and tell the story of the slavery and the Exodus, must be part of a Tikkun, rectification of the division within the community. At Pi Hahirot, Egypt was united, with one heart: they were united in passion, for this was a place that represented the passion of idolatry wrapped up with sexual licentiousness. The Jews will need to pass through this place in order to become free: They will need to be tested, just as Yosef was tested and as Yosef’s brothers were tested.
In fact, they are successful in both aspects of the test. They pass through Pi Hahirot and arrive at the sea, and nature is upended: The sea yields in the presence of Yosef, who withstood his own human nature in his extraordinary escape from temptation. Significantly, it is Moshe who carries Yosef out, invoking this great moral role-model. Moshe is from the tribe of Levi, who along with Shimon were Yosef’s greatest adversaries. This is an important step toward healing the rift, reuniting the family of Israel, and becoming whole.
Leaving Egypt was not easy. It required physical, emotional and religious transformation. The path through Pi Hahirot may at first glance have seemed a counter-intuitive choice: it might have empowered the Egyptians, for it was the focal point of their depravity. But this is precisely why this route was the most appropriate corridor, leading to our collective transformation: Here, the Jews saw the work of their own hands at Pitom, and as they crossed near the symbol of Egyptian depravity, in fact it was the Jews who were empowered. They became impervious to this idolatry. This was the path from Egypt to Sinai. It was paved with liberation, revelation, and transformation.
From Pi Hahirot the Jews crossed through the waters of Yam Suf, immersing in what would normally have been a mikva. But because of the route they had travelled to arrive there, the Jews had already achieved holiness and did not need the waters to purify them. Significantly, the events at the sea take place on the seventh day after they left Egypt, the day husband and wife are reunited after she immerses in the mikva. The Zohar[15] takes this idea even further, describing the seven week period between Pesach and Shavuot, between Exodus and Revelation, as a time of purification and preparation, linking the counting of the omer to the counting of a woman’s seven clean days before immersion and reuniting with her husband.
At Sinai, each family, each husband and wife, and consequently the community as a whole, stood, once again, “as one person with one heart”. They had corrected the interpersonal rift at Marah, and the tribal rift at the splitting of the sea. And at the foot of Mount Sinai, at that very moment of unity, Moshe relays a strange law: Husbands and wives are to separate in preparation for the Revelation. For Sinai will symbolize a new marriage, both between man and God, and between each couple. They will begin again, begin anew, in a union based on holiness. Through this act of separation, through this act of self-restraint, they all become holy – they all become like Yosef. They are all ready to receive the Torah, one unified nation, conceived in holiness – and completely free.
[1] Rashi offers two interpretations for chamushim: first, that they were armed, and second, that only one of five Israelites (one fifth of the total Jewish population) left Egypt.
[2] See Yehoshua 1:8
יהושע פרק א
(ח) לֹא יָמוּשׁ סֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה מִפִּיךָ וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה לְמַעַן תִּשְׁמֹר לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּכָל הַכָּתוּב בּוֹ כִּי אָז תַּצְלִיחַ אֶת דְּרָכֶךָ וְאָז תַּשְׂכִּיל:
[3] It is interesting that when the Jews sin with the Golden Calf, they are made to drink the ground up pieces, which is also reminiscent of the bitter water ordeal. See Shmot 32:20
[4] See the Shem M’shmuel who notices the term and explains that the Egyptians were given this unity for a holy purpose, namely to induce the Israelites to repent and come closer to God.
ספר שם משמואל פרשת וישלח - שנת תרפ"א
ודומה לזה הגיד כ"ק אבי אדמו"ר זללה"ה בהא דכתיב על הים וישאו בנ"י את עיניהם והנה מצרים נוסע אחריהם וייראו מאד וגו', שלכאורה איננו מובן מה היתה היראה הלא כבר ראו אותות ומופתים למכביר. אך ברש"י והנה מצרים בלב אחד כאיש אחד, וידוע שזה לא נמצא בטומאה שהם ענפין מתפרדין, ע"כ כשראו שהמצרים הם בלב אחד כאיש אחד, חשבו שבודאי יש אצלם עתה כחות קדושה ומזה נתיראו, אך האומנם שהי' כן שכ"ז הי' מפאת כחות קדושה, אבל הי' זה כדי לקרב לבם של ישראל לתשובה ולא ח"ו לעזור למצרים, עכ"ד. וכן י"ל נמי בהא דנתירא יעקב, מפני שחשב שבודאי יש כחות קדושה עם עשו, ובאמת שגם זה כך הי' בשביל שנתאוה הקב"ה לתפלתו של יעקב ע"כ נשלחו לעשו כחות קדושה:
[5] See Talmud Bavli Eruvin 54a and Pirkie Avot 6:2
תלמוד בבלי מסכת עירובין דף נד עמוד א
ואמר רבי (אליעזר) ]מסורת הש"ס: אלעזר]: מאי דכתיב )שמות ל"ב( חרות על הלחת - אלמלי לא נשתברו לוחות הראשונות לא נשתכחה תורה מישראל. רב אחא בר יעקב אמר: אין כל אומה ולשון שולטת בהן, שנאמר חרות אל תיקרי חרות אלא חירות:
משנה מסכת אבות פרק ו
ואומר והלוחות מעשה אלהים המה והמכתב מכתב אלהים הוא חרות על הלוחות אל תקרא חרות אלא חירות שאין לך בן חורין אלא מי שעוסק בתלמוד תורה וכל מי שעוסק בתורה תדיר הרי זה מתעלה שנאמר )במדבר כ"א י"ט( וממתנה נחליאל ומנחליאל במות:
[6] Certain mystical sources see the passage through the sea as a national rebirth experience, as they travel, physically and symbolically into a new stage of existence through a wondrous passageway between the waters.
[7] Midrashic sources describe the geographic formation of these rocks. See Mechilta Bshalach 5:1 for a description which evokes the image of the keruvim:
מכילתא פרשת בשלח פרשה א
וישובו ויחנו לפני פי החירות. מה חירות הללו לא היו משופעות אלא גדודיות ולא היו תרוטות אלא מוקפות ולא היו עגולות אלא מרובעות ולא היו מעשה אדם אלא מעשה שמים ועיני' היו להם לפותחו' כמן זכר וכמן נקיבה היו דברי רבי אליעזר. רבי יהושע אומר החירות מצד זה ומגדול מצד זה הים לפניה' ומצרים לאחריה'. דבר אחר פי החירות אין חירות אלא מקום חירותן של ישראל מקום מובחר להם מקום עבודה זרה שלהם. לשעבר היתה נקראת פיתום שנאמר שמות א' ויבן ערי מסכנות לפרעה את פיתום ואת רעמסס חזרו להם להקראת פי החירות שהיא מאחרת לעובדיה.
[8] Vayikra 18:3. See below.
[9] See Talmud Bavli Sotah 13b
תלמוד בבלי מסכת סוטה דף יג עמוד ב
ויקנהו פוטיפר סריס פרעה - אמר רב: שקנאו לעצמו. (בא גבריאל וסירסו) בא גבריאל ופירעו, מעיקרא כתיב פוטיפר, ולבסוף פוטיפרע.
[10] Sifra Acharei Mot section 8.
ספרא פרשת אחרי מות פרשתא ח
ח) אי כמעשה ארץ מצרים וכמעשה ארץ כנען לא תעשו יכול לא יבנו בניינים ולא יטעו נטיעות כמותם תלמוד לומר ובחוקותיהם לא תלכו לא אמרתי אלא בחוקים החקוקים להם ולאבותיהם ולאבות אבותיהם. ומה היו עושים האיש נושא לאיש והאשה לאשה האיש נושא אשה ובתה והאשה ניסת לשנים לכך אמר ובחוקותיהם לא תלכו:
[11] See Midrash Rabba Vayikra 23:9
מדרש רבה ויקרא פרשה כג פסקה ט
תני רבי ישמעאל כמעשה ארץ מצרים וכמעשה ארץ כנען לא תעשו וגו' ואם לאו אני ה' אלהיכם תני רבי חייא למה אני ה' כתיב שני פעמים אני הוא שפרעתי מדור המבול ומסדום וממצרים אני עתיד ליפרע ממי שהוא עושה כמעשיהם דור המבול נמחו מן העולם ע"י שהיו שטופין בזנות אמר רבי שמלאי כל מקום שאתה מוצא זנות אנדרלמוסיא באה לעולם והורגת טובים ורעים רב הונא בשם רבי יוסי אמר דור המבול לא נמחו מן העולם אלא ע"י שכתבו גומסיות לזכר ולנקבה ר' עזריה בשם רבי יהודה ברבי סימון וריב"ל בשם בר קפרא מצינו שעל הכל הקב"ה מאריך רוחו חוץ מן הזנות בלבד ואית ליה קריין סגיין שנא' (בראשית ו) ויהי כי החל האדם ויראו בני האלהים את בנות האדם וירא ה' כי רבה רעת האדם ויאמר ה' אמחה את האדם סדומיים ריב"ל בשם בר קפרא אמר כל אותו הלילה היה לוט עומד ומדבר עליהם סניגוריא כיון שבאו ואמרו לו (שם יט) איה האנשים ונדעה אותם בתשמיש מיד ויאמרו האנשים אל לוט עוד מי לך פה עד כאן היה לך פתחון פה ללמד עליהם סניגוריא אלא חתן בניך ובנותיך כי משחיתים אנחנו אני ה' אני הוא שנפרעתי משמשון ומאמנון ומזמרי ועתיד אני ליפרע ממי שיעשה כמעשיהם אני הוא ששלמתי ליוסף ליעל ולפלטי בן ליש אני עתיד לשלם שכר למי שעושה כמעשיהם
9. R. Ishmael taught: AFTER THE DOINGS OF THE LAND OF EGYPT... AND AFTER THE DOINGS OF THE LAND OF CANAAN... SHALL YE NOT DO, etc. (XVIII, 3), otherwise, I AM THE LORD YOUR GOD (ib. 4). R. Hiyya taught: Why is I AM THE LORD written twice? It implies: I am He who inflicted punishment upon the Generation of the Flood, upon Sodom, and upon Egypt, and I am the same who will inflict punishment upon any one who will act in accordance with their practices. The Generation of the Flood were blotted out from the world because they were steeped in whoredom. R. Samlai observed: In every instance where you find the prevalence of whoredom, an androlepsia1 comes upon the world and slays both good and bad. R. Huna says in the name of R. Jose: The Generation of the Flood were only blotted out of the world on account of their having written hymenean songs for sodomy. R. ‘Azariah in the name of R. Judah son of R. Simeon and R. Joshua b. Levi in the name of Bar Kappara say: We find that the Holy One, blessed be He, is long-suffering towards every offence except whoredom, and there are numerous texts to bear this out; as it says, And came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth... that the sons of God saw the daughters of men... and they took them wives... And the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great... And the Lord said: I will blot out man (Gen. VI, 1 ff). What of the Sodomites? R. Joshua son of Levi in the name of Bar Kappara said: During the whole of the night in question Lot was busy pleading on their behalf, but when they came and said to him: Where are the men... bring them out unto us, that we may know them (ib. XIX, 5)--’know them,’ that is to say, carnally--then forthwith The men said unto Lot: Hast thou here (poh) any besides? (ib. 12). By ’poh’ they as much as said: Until this moment you had a pretext (pithhon peh) for pleading in their favour, but now Son-in-law, and thy sons, and thy daughters... bring them out of the place; for we will destroy this place (ib. 13 f). ’I am the Lord’ implies: I am He who inflicted punishment upon Samson, Amnon, and Zimri, and who will in the inflict punishment upon any one who will act in accordance with their practices. I am He who requited Joseph, Jael, and Palti the son of Laish, and I will in the future pay reward to any one who acts in accordance with their deeds.
[12] The third place which was included to form an unholy trinity with the generation of the flood and Egypt, was Sodom was cleansed with lava and fire, not water. Generally there are connections, thematic and linguistic, between Sodom and Egypt.
[13] Rabbi Mordechai Yosef Leiner of Izbica in his Mei Shiloach Parshat Bshalach, suggests that the male/female image of Pi haHirot was an expression of the pagan perspective of freedom as a lack of law or structure. To the pagan mind, Pi haHirot was a place of freedom because there laws applied, sexually was not limited or regulated.
ספר מי השילוח - פרשת בשלח
וישובו ויחנו לפני פי החירות, ענין כח הטומאה של ע"ז הזאת היא קליפת זנות והיתה דמות זכר ונקבה, וע"כ קראו שמה פי החירות כי אצל האומות נראה שבמקום שיוכל להתפשט ולעשות כל תאות לבו שם הוא בן חורין, ע"כ נאמר ואמר פרעה נבוכים הם בארץ כו'. היינו כשיגיעו לפני ע"ז הלזו יהיה נראה שהם משועבדים מאחר שהם מוגדרים מאוד בזאת התאוה, אך באמת הוא להיפך שהם משועבדים לזה הדבר. שהרי מאחר שאין לבם ברשותם אשר השכל ימשול עליהם רק תאותם מושלת עליהם אין לך משעבוד גדול מזה:
[14] See Shem Mshmuel Bshalach 5675: Faith (emunah) is what causes the sea to be split, creating a parallel with the hands of Moshe, which are called emunah, in the defeat of Amalek.
ספר שם משמואל פרשת בשלח - שנת תרע"ה
ע"כ ויסב אלקים את העם דרך המדבר ים סוף, ואמצעות האמונה שהלכו אחריו למדבר בלי מזון ומחי', ואח"כ כששבו ויחנו לפני פי החירות ולא אמרו היאך נתקרב אל רודפינו כדי שלא לשבור את לב הטף והנשים אלא אמרו אין לנו אלא דברי בן עמרם, וכן על הים שנכנסו למים עד חוטמם, זה עצמו הי' מירוק לפגם השכל, במה שבטלו את שכלם לרצון הש"י, זה השלים מה שהי' חסר מפאת חוסר הזמן עד ד' מאות שנה, ונעשו ראויים למ"ת, ואלמלא העגל לא היו צריכין עוד לשום מירוק. אך אמונה זו לא כ"כ קלה היא ולא כל הרוצה ליטול את השם יבוא ויטול, אלא ע"י שהיו שומרי הברית, ובסוד (ישעי' ס') ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ והבן. וזה ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו, וזהו שבמדרש (פ' כ"ב) בזכות האמונה נקרע להם הים, ועוד אמרו בשביל ארונו של יוסף נקרע הים כי זה תלוי בזה:
[15] Zohar Vayikra 97b
Just as a woman then has to count seven days, so now God bade the Israelites count days for purity. They were to count for themselves, so as to be purified with supernal holy waters, and then to be attached to the King and to receive the Torah. The woman had to count seven days, the people seven weeks. Why seven weeks? That they might be worthy to be cleansed by the waters of that stream which is called living waters, and from which issue seven Sabbaths. When Israel drew near to Mount Sinai, that dew that descends from the supernal Point came down in its fullness and purified them so that their filth left them and they became attached to the Holy King and the Community of Israel and received the Torah, as we have explained.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Parshat Bo 5769 Rav Yehuda gave them Simanim (signs)
Parshat Bo 5769
Rav Yehuda gave them Simanim (signs)
Rabbi Ari Kahn
Seven plagues have been endured by the Egyptians, and presumably it is time for the eighth plague. Moshe is instructed to “Come to Pharoh”. The language seems strange; we would have expected the command to have been “Go to Pharoh”. What follows makes things even less clear: The purpose of this visit is not revealed. Rather than a specific message to the Egyptian monarch, a more general message of God’s dominion is transmitted:
ספר שמות פרק י
(א) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה בֹּא אֶל פַּרְעֹה כִּי אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי אֶת לִבּוֹ וְאֶת לֵב עֲבָדָיו לְמַעַן שִׁתִי אֹתֹתַי אֵלֶּה בְּקִרְבּוֹ: (ב) וּלְמַעַן תְּסַפֵּר בְּאָזְנֵי בִנְךָ וּבֶן בִּנְךָ אֵת אֲשֶׁר הִתְעַלַּלְתִּי בְּמִצְרַיִם וְאֶת אֹתֹתַי אֲשֶׁר שַׂמְתִּי בָם וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי אֲנִי ה’:
10:1 God said to Moshe, 'Come to Pharaoh for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, so that I will be able to demonstrate these miraculous signs among them. 10:2 and so that you will be able to tell your children and grandchildren what I have wrought upon Egypt, and My miraculous signs which I have performed among them, and you will then fully comprehend that I am God.'
God does not tell Moshe the nature or method of the coming plague. Rather, the rationale for the entire “system” of the plagues is revealed. Nonetheless, Moshe understands that another plague is in the offing, and that the purpose of visiting Pharoh is to warn of the impending disaster which will soon befall the Egyptian people. Despite the absence of this warning in God’s instructions, Moshe knows what to do[1].
(ג) וַיָּבֹא משֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן אֶל פַּרְעֹה וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו כֹּה אָמַר ה’ אֱלֹהֵי הָעִבְרִים עַד מָתַי מֵאַנְתָּ לֵעָנֹת מִפָּנָי שַׁלַּח עַמִּי וְיַעַבְדֻנִי: (ד) כִּי אִם מָאֵן אַתָּה לְשַׁלֵּחַ אֶת עַמִּי הִנְנִי מֵבִיא מָחָר אַרְבֶּה בִּגְבֻלֶךָ:
10:3 Moshe and Aharon came to Pharaoh and they said to him, ‘Thus said God, Lord of the Hebrews, 'How long will you refuse to submit to Me? Let My people leave that they may serve Me. 10:4 For if you refuse to let My people leave, tomorrow I will bring locusts within your borders.
Rashi explains that the strange opening words of the parsha, “come to Pharoh,” contain this warning to Pharoh: “Come to Pharoh -- and warn him”. Rashi thus resolves two problems: the inexplicable use of “come” rather than “go” is a marker for text left inexplicit – the warning that Moshe actually gives Pharoh. This warning, which could not have been a private initiative of Moshe’s, was, in Rashi’s view, transmitted by God to Moshe, either literally or by inference.
While the warning is absent in God’s instructions to Moshe, Rashi assumes it was, in fact, part of what God said to Moshe at that juncture. While the casual reader might assume that Rashi’s comments are apologetic, that he has taken the liberty to “correct” an untenable “mistake” in the text, in truth, it may be demonstrated that Rashi’s comments are far more systematic. He allows himself the latitude necessary to assume that God transmitted a warning, which was not recorded in the text, based on the pattern discernable among the plagues.
The plague of locusts is not merely one more arbitrary, random occurrence. Each of the Ten Plagues was part and parcel of a series of attacks which posses an inner logic. Each plague should be seen as one specific tactic within a larger strategy. This systematic approach is not new to those of us familiar with the Passover Haggadah. In a Rabbinicic tradition popularized in the Haggadah[2], Rabbi Yehuda divides the ten plagues into three groups, consisting respectively of three, three and four plagues, or perhaps three, three, three and one (the final plague may be a category unto itself):
1. blood
4. wild beasts
7. hail
2. frogs
5. pestilence
8. locusts
3. lice
6. boils
9. darkness
10. death of firstborn
Using this analytic device and dividing the first nine plagues into groups of three, we are able to discern certain patterns or characteristics of the system as a whole.
First, we will note similarities between the first, second and third plague of each respective group. This method forces us to recognize that the “strange” phrase ‘come to Pharoh’ is not unique to the eighth plague. As our system dictates, this same phrase introduces the second plague in each of the sub-sets (the plague of frogs, second in the order of plagues and second of the first set, as well as pestilence, the fifth in the order of plagues, second in the second set). Interestingly, the first plague of each set (blood, #1; wild beasts, #4; hail, #7) is introduced by the words ‘go to Pharoh,” precisely as we would expect in the case of all of the plagues. What is the difference between these two turns of phrase? Reading the text with careful attention to context, it becomes clear that whenever “come” is used, the destination is the palace. Whenever “go” is used, the destination is the Nile.[3]
For the Egyptians generally, and Pharoh in particular, the Nile represented power. The Nile was the life force of Egypt.
ספר יחזקאל פרק כט
(ב) בֶּן אָדָם שִׂים פָּנֶיךָ עַל פַּרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרָיִם וְהִנָּבֵא עָלָיו וְעַל מִצְרַיִם כֻּלָּהּ:(ג) דַּבֵּר וְאָמַרְתָּ כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יֱדֹוִד הִנְנִי עָלֶיךָ פַּרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם הַתַּנִּים הַגָּדוֹל הָרֹבֵץ בְּתוֹךְ יְאֹרָיו אֲשֶׁר אָמַר לִי יְאֹרִי וַאֲנִי עֲשִׂיתִנִי:
2. 'Son of man, confront Pharoh, King of Egypt, and prophesy regarding him, and all of Egypt; 3. Speak, and say: Thus said the L-rd GOD: behold, I am above you, Pharaoh King of Egypt, the great dragon that lies in the midst of his rivers, that has said: My river is mine, and I have made it for myself. Yechezkel 29:2,3
The Nile was considered a physical representation of the power of Pharoh, a power fueled by delusions of grandeur and steeped in pagan rituals and beliefs. It is therefore of particular interest that the first plague of each “triplet” was announced at the Nile, at the epicenter of this contrived, self-absorbed world, headquarters of Egypt’s cultic activity. In each such instance, God instructs Moshe to “go” – without Him, as it were. Even though God is Omnipresent, filling all of His creation, and there can be no place devoid of His presence, the text “leaves God out of the frame” in the scenes that unfold in the place of pagan worship.[4] There, Moshe and Aharon are sent alone.[5] Notwithstanding God’s assurance when Moshe was hesitant to accept his role as savior (“I will be with you”), God’s Presence is hidden in places of pagan ritual observance.
As we have seen, the second plague in each group of three is characterized by the phrase “come to Pharoh”. Here, the meaning may be more accurately expressed as “come with me to Pharoh”. In this case, the implication is that God will accompany Moshe. The destination is the palace, and we are to understand that God is manifest at these meetings.
Regarding the third plague of each set, there is no warning: Pharoh is no longer involved.[6]
Thus we see that Rabbi Yehuda’s system of breaking the plagues into groups of three is more than a convenient mnemonic device to help us remember the plagues in their proper order. The similarities and differences between the plagues take on new significance when the pattern is discerned. However, this system goes even further, affording deeper insight into the nature of the plagues themselves, and the entire process of leaving Egypt.
The first plague of each set (blood, wild beasts and hail) may be seen as an invasion of Egyptian territory. Most notably, in the first plague the Nile itself was struck; the image of the Egyptian life-force bleeding was certainly not lost on the pagan Egyptians. These three plagues were an annoyance; the Egyptians were made to feel uncomfortable in a general sense, but were more of a public than a private nuisance as compared to the third plague in each triplet. The third plague of each set (lice, boils, blinding darkness) came without warning, neither at the banks of the Nile nor in the palace. They simply arrived. These third plagues were a punishment for ignoring the first two in each triplet, hence no warning and no chance to reverse or avoid the punishment was offered.[7] These three plagues were personal afflictions, visited upon each and every Egyptian.
Rav Shimshon ben Raphael Hirsch[8] explains that the first plague in each triplet was designed to make the Egyptians feel like strangers in their own land, upending the most basic governing principles that ordered their world. The second plague in each triplet was designed to counter the feeling of superiority that lies at the core of being a slave-owner. These plagues were most closely involved with possessions (the frogs infested the Egyptians’ homes and spoiled their bread, the pestilence killed their herds, and the locusts wiped out their crops). The third plague of each group was essentially different: There were lessons to be learned from the first two plagues in each set – moral lessons, social values, philosophical tenets. The third plague in each set was a punishment for having neglected to heed the lessons of the two preceding plagues, and therefore each of these plagues contains an element of physical torture.
When Moshe and Aharon were sent to perform the first in each group of plagues, we understand why they were “sent”. Regarding the third plague in each group, no warning was forthcoming. But is there something objectively different about the nature of the second plague in each group, where God invites Moshe to join him, “come to Pharoh”? What was the purpose of such an invitation? Was there something about these plagues that made it appropriate for them to be initiated at the place? Moreover, as the plagues progress, why is Moshe allowed to continue to come to the palace and torment the monarch? The Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh points out that Pharoh and the palace were surely well protected; the fact that Moshe walked in unmolested is part of what intimidated Pharoh. Moshe did not seek permission; he entered unannounced. Pharoh’s bodyguards quivered, his guard dogs whimpered, and this only added to Pharoh’s humiliation.[9]
This abrupt treatment of Pharoh is not echoed by all commentaries. Rashi, for one, was of the opinion that Pharoh should be treated with respect.[10] Rabbi Soloveitchik followed this line of reasoning and took it a few steps further. He explained that there was a schism running through the personality of Pharoh. While he was certainly an evil despot, he was also something else: a person, a human being, a father. Even Pharoh was created in God’s image:
"Bo el Paroh" (come to Pharoh) is different from the wording used in the Torah in Sedra Va'era when G-d sent Moshe to confront Pharoh for the first plague of blood at the Nile River. There, we find the word lech (go)… The words bo or lech are characteristic of the message...Moshe was told to approach Pharoh as the emperor and also to approach "another" Pharoh: the private person, the individual. When he approached Pharoh as the king [lech el Paroh], he met him at the Nile, the symbol of power in Egypt. "Address yourself to the power-oriented Pharoh at the source of power, the Nile. Stop him; block him. Tell him there are forces stronger (than he). Place yourself strongly in front of him and protest!" [Elsewhere], we find the word bo used: "Go into the king in [his home] … whe[re] he is an ordinary man, a person, a father. Tell him how wrong it is to throw a child into the water. Tell him about Avraham, about morality. Perhaps he will respond." There is a spark of good even in the most wicked. We use the word bo when we ask someone to come closer.[11] Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik
There are times that require confrontation, challenge, even battle. There are times that require a different approach, a person-to-person approach, an appeal to the other’s sense of decency. The plan regarding Pharoh was a dual plan: He was challenged publicly, his beloved Nile turned to blood, and he was approached privately, when he could let his guard down, when his subjects were not watching, when he might be persuaded to do the right thing.
Judaism believes that every mortal king’s rule is a gift from God; hence, the blessing one recites when seeing a king: “Blessed are You, God, King of the Universe, who has given of His glory to flesh and blood. [12]” In his palace, away from the corrupt, delusional pagan cult of the Nile, Pharoh was treated with respect, treated as a king. God, as it were, accompanied Moshe to the palace, and together they attempted to connect with the tzelem Elokim hiding inside Pharoh the man. Moshe reached out to a man who may have been to him as a father or brother. During his early years, had Moshe spoken to this man about morals, beliefs, aspirations? Had they discussed Moshe’s emerging sense of identity, his spiritual awakening? Now, Moshe spoke with him again, hoping to strike a chord buried deep within. Instead, Moshe found a man who had deaf ears and a hardened heart. His pleas went unheeded. Pharoh was offered the opportunity to rise above, to respond with the greatness and grandeur befitting all children of God, especially a king.
Sadly, Pharoh did not respond to this type of plea any more than he did to intimidation or to fear. Striking the Nile made no impression on him; when the curtain was drawn back and he was revealed to all as a man, not a god or a wizard, he did not succumb. Words spoken to his very humanity, in the palace, in his home where his children laughed and played, in the presence of his Creator and true source of his dominion, did not sway him. Consequently, he lost not only his slaves, but his kingdom. The stage for the tenth, most tragic plague, was set by Pharoh’s own intransigence, and he would lose everything.
[1] The Ktav V’kabalah (Shmot 10:1) explains that the torah does not record the entire conversation, but God did say more to Moshe that what is recorded.
הכתב והקבלה על שמות פרק י פסוק א
(א) בא אל פרעה. מקרא קצר הוא וחסר לשון, ואמרת אליו,
[2] The earliest source for this teaching is found in the Sifri Parshat Ki Tavo section 5
ספרי פרשת תבא פיסקא ה
ר' יהודה היה נותן בהם סימנים דצ"ך עד"ש באח”ב
[3] See Baal Haturim, Sh’mot 10:1
בעל הטורים על שמות פרק י פסוק א
(א) בא אל פרעה - כשהיה אומר לו לבא לביתו היה אומר לו בא וכשהיה אומר לו לילך אליו המימה היה אומר לו לך.
[4] See comments of Daat Zkeinim M’baalei Hatosfot, Sh’mot 8:16
דעת זקנים מבעלי התוספות על שמות פרק ח פסוק טז
השכם - תמוה מאי שנא דבמקום אחד כתיב בא ובמקום אחר כתיב השכם. ושמעתי מהרב יצחק ז"ל דבא משמע בא עמי ואלך עמך ובמקום אחר שכתוב השכם כתיב הנה יוצא המימה פי' לעשות צרכיו ואין זה דרך כבוד שתלך שם שכינה.
[5] In the first and fourth plagues, the text specifically refers to the Nile. In the case of the eighth plague, this context is inferred: In the fourth plague (8:16), the text reads, “God said to Moshe, 'Get up early in the morning, and confront Pharoh when he goes out to the water.” Getting up early was necessary, for that was the time that Pharoh went to the Nile. In the seventh plague the word Nile is missing, “9:13 God told Moshe to get up early in the morning and confront Pharaoh,” but Moshe is told to get up early, presumably again to go to the Nile. See comments of the Ramban on Sh’mot 8:15.
רמב"ן על שמות פרק ח פסוק טו
ואמר במקצת המכות השכם בבקר הנה יוצא המימה, ועל דרך הפשט היה בעת צאת המלכים בבקר להשתעשע על המים, וצוה הקב"ה למשה שילך שם והטעם, כי בדם בעבור היותה המכה הראשונה רצה שיעשנה לעיניו ובלי יראה ממנו וזה טעם ונצבת לקראתו (לעיל ז טו), והתיצב לפני פרעה (פסוק טז), שיעמוד כנגדו ביד רמה וכן במכת הערוב נאמר השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה הנה יוצא המימה ובברד (להלן ט יג) השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה, והוא גם כן בצאתו המימה, כי הערוב והברד אשר בהן המיתה והעונש לבני אדם רצה הקב"ה שיהיה לעיני כל העם, כי בצאת המלך המימה ילכו מרבית העם אחריו, והנה יתרה אותו לעיניהם אולי יצעקו אל אדוניהם לשוב מדרכו הרעה, ואם לא יעשו כן יהיו חייבין להענש אבל בשאר המכות די בהתראת המלך, ועל כן נאמר בהן בא אל פרעה (לעיל ז כו, להלן ט א, י א), שיבא אל היכלו, ולא הזכיר בכנים ובשחין כן, בעבור שהוצרך אהרן להכות בעפר, והיכל המלך אין שם עפר כי היא רצפת בהט ושש, וכן הוצרך משה לזרוק הפיח השמימה והנה עשו אלו השתים בפני פרעה בהיותו בחצר גינת ביתן המלך או כיוצא בו:
[6] See comments of Rashbam Sh’mot 7:26
רשב"ם על שמות פרק ז פסוק כו
(כו) ויאמר ה' אל משה בא אל פרעה - שני פעמים היה משה מתרה את פרעה בשני מכות ובשלישית לא היה מתרה. וכן כל הסדר (בכל שלש' סבות אינו מתרה בשלישית) בדם ובצפרדע התרה בכנים לא התרה. בערוב ובדבר התרה. בשחין לא התרה. בברד ובארבה התרה. בחשך לא התרה:
[7] Many commentaries make this observation. See Chizkuni Sh’mot 8:15, Commentary of the Baali Hatosfot 7:25, Commentary of the Rosh 6:3, Rabbenu Bachya 10:1.
חזקוני על שמות פרק ח פסוק טו
וכן היה הסדר בשתים היה מתרה ובשלישית מכה בלא התראה. דכיון שחטא אדם ושנה נעשה לו כהיתר, מה תועלת יש בהתראתו מאחר שלא יחזור בו. ועוד כי כנים חושך שחין שהיו מכות שלישיות הם מכות הוות ולא ישוב באזהרתם, ולפיכך שהיו משולשות ר' יהודה היה נותן בהם סימנים דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב. רק במכת בכורות ששתפה עם שלש אחרונות שאין נכון לקבוע תיבה בשביל אות אחת. וי"מ נתן בהם סימנים שלא יאמרו העולם עקר הוייתן בסדר תהלים, ושם אינו מונה המכות על הסדר שמונה אותם כאן.
פירוש בעלי התוספות על שמות פרק ז פסוק כה
ותירץ ה"ר יוסף בכור שור לפי שלא הוצרכו התראה. שבלא התראה באות ורגילות לבא. אבל שאר מכות שאין רגילות לבא לעולם התרה עליהם. וזהו הסימן דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב פי' עד"ש ערוב דבר בהתראה. שחין שהיתה שלישית בלא התראה. דצ"ך דם צפרדע בהתראה. כנים בלא התראה שהיתה שלישית. באח"ב פי' ברד ארבה בהתראה. חשך בלא התראה וזהו באח"ב ולכך נתן בהם ר' יהודה סימנין בג' תיבות. דצ"ך ע"י אהרן. עד"ש ע"י משה. וע"י הקב"ה באח"ב. עוד י"ל טעמא שלא התרו בו בג' מכות לפי שמי שלקה ושנה בה מכניסין אותו לכיפה בלא התראה לפי' לא התרוהו במכה שלישית ורביעית ובחמשית התרוהו ובששית לא התרוהו וכן כולם:
פירוש הרא"ש על שמות פרק ו פסוק ג
איתא בהגדה דליל פסח ר' יהודה היה נותן בהם סימנים דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב. מה ראה ר' יהודה לתת הסימנים הללו והלא מי שיראה סדר המכות בפסוק יכול לעשות כמוהו. וי"ל דהסימן בא להראות לנו שכל מכה שלישית היתה בלא התראה כנים שחין חשך ובכל ב' הראשונות מלקין ואין מלקין בלא התראה לכן דם צפרדע בהתראה. שלישי' בלא התראה כדאמרי' לקה ושנה כונסין אותו לכיפה ואתי כמה דאיתמר כיפה אין צריך התראה וכן שחין חשך בלא התראה. וקשה למה צריך בכל ראש שלישית ושלישית ב' התראות בהתראת דם צפרדע סגי. י"ל כל שלישית ושלישית מכות חדשות בפני עצמן לכך צריך לכל שלישית שתי התראות שפרעה היה סבור שלא ישובו עוד כיון שלא הוזהר פעם ראשונה. א"נ ג' ראשונות ע"י אהרן ג' שניות על ידי משה ג' שלישיות על ידי הקב"ה וא' ע"י כולם ועל שהיו חלוקות הוזקקו התראות חדשות על ידי הקב"ה דבר חשך מכת בכורות ע"י משה ערוב ברד ארבה דצ"ך ע"י אהרן שחין ע"י שלשתם. אותם דאהרן היו מן הארץ לפי שלא היה מעלתו כ"כ אותם דמשה מאויר אותם דהקב"ה משמים וארץ ומאויר שחין מכל.
רבינו בחיי על שמות פרק י פסוק א
ויאמר ה' אל משה בא אל פרעה כי אני הכבדתי את לבו ואת לב עבדיו וגו' - ודרשו רז"ל כי עשר מכות דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב כמו שהם מסודרות בתורה כסדר הזה היו השתים בהתראה והשלישית שלא בהתראה, ד"צ בהתראה, ך' בלא התראה ע"ד בהתראה, ש' בלא התראה, ב"א בהתראה, ח' בלא התראה, מכת בכורות שהיא העשירית בהתראה כי יחזור לסדור הראשון, זה דרשו רז"ל והפרשיות מוכיחות כן:
ואם תסתכל בכתובים בכל הפרשיות תמצא כי השתים שהן בהתראה באחת יאמר התיצב לפני פרעה ובשניה יאמר בא אל פרעה. התחיל במכת הדם לך אל פרעה בבקר ונצבת לקראתו על שפת היאור ובמכת צפרדעים הזכיר בא אל פרעה, מכת הכנים אין שם התראה, ומכאן דרשו רז"ל מי שלקה ושנה שוב אין מתרין אותו. במכת הערוב חזר לסדורו הראשון והזכיר שם השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה הנה יוצא המימה, ובמכת הדבר הזכיר בא אל פרעה, מכת השחין אין שם התראה. במכת הברד חזר לסדורו הראשון והזכיר שם השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה, ובמכת הארבה שבכאן הזכיר בא אל פרעה, מכת חשך אין שם התראה:
וע"כ נראה לי לפרש כי משה היה מודיעו המכה והיה עושה לו התראה פעם אחת על היאור ופעם שנית בהיכלו, וענין בא אל פרעה שיזכירו הכתובים בכל פעם ופעם באורו שיכנס בהיכלו, והכתובים מוכיחים כן כי מעת שהתרה לו במכת הדם על שפת היאור הגיד הכתוב כי מיד נכנס פרעה אל היכלו שנאמר ויבא אל ביתו ולא שת לבו גם לזאת, וטעם הדבר שהיו כל ההתראות כסדור הזה התראה אחת על יאורו והתראה אחרת בהיכלו להורות על ענשו וגאותו וגאונו כי היה מתגאה על יאורו כענין שכתוב (יחזקאל כט) לי יאורי ואני עשיתיני, והיה מתגאה בהיכלו והוא שכתוב ויבא אל ביתו, יאמר כי מצד שנכנס להיכלו ונתגאה בו היה בז לדברי משה ולא שת לבו גם לזאת,
[8] Commentary of Rav Shimshon ben Raphael Hirsch on Sh’mot 7:15
[9] Ohr Hachaim, Sh’mot 9:1
אור החיים על שמות פרק ט פסוק א
(א) בא אל פרעה כלל זה בידך כל מקום שיאמר בא אל פרעה יכוין לומר לו שיכנס אל טרקלין שלו בלא השאלת רשות, הגם שהיו לו כמשפט המלכים שומרי הבית אף על פי כן יעול ויכנס אצלו מבלי שאלת רשות, וכן היה עושה, כאומרם ז"ל ו כי כמה שומרים היו לפרעה מזוינים ואריות וכלבים והיה נכנס באין מונע ומצאתי ראיה ברורה לדבריהם ז"ל, ממה שאמר פרעה למשה השמר לך וגו' אל תוסף ראות פני וגו' (להלן י כח), כי למה הוצרך פרעה להתרות במשה והיה לו לצוות לעבדיו שומרי הבית, כי כן מנהג המלכים להעמיד שומרי המלך, ולהם יצוה שלא יניחוהו ליכנס, אלא ודאי כי לא עמדו כנגדו ואפילו אריות וזה נס עצום, לזה היה ה' צריך לומר לו בא אל פרעה פירוש הכנס ועלה אליו ולא תשים לבך למונע בעולם ובזמן שהיה פרעה יוצא המימה היה אומר לו לך אל פרעה, כי שם אין שומרים לירא מהם להצטרך לומר אליו עלה אליו, אלא לצד שאין זמן זה ראוי להליכה כי הוא מוציא בולעו התעוב ואינו מהמוסר, לזה אומר לו לך אף על פי כן:
[10] See Rashi Sh’mot 6:13
רש"י על שמות פרק ו פסוק יג
ואל פרעה מלך מצרים - צום עליו לחלוק לו כבוד בדבריהם זהו מדרשו. (ע"ע רש"י ה:ג, יא:ח)
[11] From a public lecture delivered in January, 1975. I have collected, and hope to publish, much of the material surrounding the Pesach Haggadah taught at these lectures.
[12] See Shulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim, Section 224, based on Talmud Bavli Brachot 58a.
הרואה מלך ישראל אומר: בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה ‘אֱלֹהֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם שֶׁחָלַק מִכְּבוֹדוֹ לִירֵאָיו :הרואה מלך מאומות העולם אומר:
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה ‘אֱלֹהֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם שֶׁנָּתַן מִכְּבוֹדוֹ לְבָשָׂר וָדָם: שו"ע אורח חיים - סימן רכד: (ח) על המלכים אומר: בא"י אלהינו מלך העולם שחלק מכבודו ליראיו; ועל מלכי עובדי כוכבים אומר, ברוך שנתן מכבודו לבשר ודם:(ט) מצוה להשתדל לראות מלכים, אפילו מלכי אומות העולם:
Rav Yehuda gave them Simanim (signs)
Rabbi Ari Kahn
Seven plagues have been endured by the Egyptians, and presumably it is time for the eighth plague. Moshe is instructed to “Come to Pharoh”. The language seems strange; we would have expected the command to have been “Go to Pharoh”. What follows makes things even less clear: The purpose of this visit is not revealed. Rather than a specific message to the Egyptian monarch, a more general message of God’s dominion is transmitted:
ספר שמות פרק י
(א) וַיֹּאמֶר ה’ אֶל משֶׁה בֹּא אֶל פַּרְעֹה כִּי אֲנִי הִכְבַּדְתִּי אֶת לִבּוֹ וְאֶת לֵב עֲבָדָיו לְמַעַן שִׁתִי אֹתֹתַי אֵלֶּה בְּקִרְבּוֹ: (ב) וּלְמַעַן תְּסַפֵּר בְּאָזְנֵי בִנְךָ וּבֶן בִּנְךָ אֵת אֲשֶׁר הִתְעַלַּלְתִּי בְּמִצְרַיִם וְאֶת אֹתֹתַי אֲשֶׁר שַׂמְתִּי בָם וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי אֲנִי ה’:
10:1 God said to Moshe, 'Come to Pharaoh for I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, so that I will be able to demonstrate these miraculous signs among them. 10:2 and so that you will be able to tell your children and grandchildren what I have wrought upon Egypt, and My miraculous signs which I have performed among them, and you will then fully comprehend that I am God.'
God does not tell Moshe the nature or method of the coming plague. Rather, the rationale for the entire “system” of the plagues is revealed. Nonetheless, Moshe understands that another plague is in the offing, and that the purpose of visiting Pharoh is to warn of the impending disaster which will soon befall the Egyptian people. Despite the absence of this warning in God’s instructions, Moshe knows what to do[1].
(ג) וַיָּבֹא משֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן אֶל פַּרְעֹה וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֵלָיו כֹּה אָמַר ה’ אֱלֹהֵי הָעִבְרִים עַד מָתַי מֵאַנְתָּ לֵעָנֹת מִפָּנָי שַׁלַּח עַמִּי וְיַעַבְדֻנִי: (ד) כִּי אִם מָאֵן אַתָּה לְשַׁלֵּחַ אֶת עַמִּי הִנְנִי מֵבִיא מָחָר אַרְבֶּה בִּגְבֻלֶךָ:
10:3 Moshe and Aharon came to Pharaoh and they said to him, ‘Thus said God, Lord of the Hebrews, 'How long will you refuse to submit to Me? Let My people leave that they may serve Me. 10:4 For if you refuse to let My people leave, tomorrow I will bring locusts within your borders.
Rashi explains that the strange opening words of the parsha, “come to Pharoh,” contain this warning to Pharoh: “Come to Pharoh -- and warn him”. Rashi thus resolves two problems: the inexplicable use of “come” rather than “go” is a marker for text left inexplicit – the warning that Moshe actually gives Pharoh. This warning, which could not have been a private initiative of Moshe’s, was, in Rashi’s view, transmitted by God to Moshe, either literally or by inference.
While the warning is absent in God’s instructions to Moshe, Rashi assumes it was, in fact, part of what God said to Moshe at that juncture. While the casual reader might assume that Rashi’s comments are apologetic, that he has taken the liberty to “correct” an untenable “mistake” in the text, in truth, it may be demonstrated that Rashi’s comments are far more systematic. He allows himself the latitude necessary to assume that God transmitted a warning, which was not recorded in the text, based on the pattern discernable among the plagues.
The plague of locusts is not merely one more arbitrary, random occurrence. Each of the Ten Plagues was part and parcel of a series of attacks which posses an inner logic. Each plague should be seen as one specific tactic within a larger strategy. This systematic approach is not new to those of us familiar with the Passover Haggadah. In a Rabbinicic tradition popularized in the Haggadah[2], Rabbi Yehuda divides the ten plagues into three groups, consisting respectively of three, three and four plagues, or perhaps three, three, three and one (the final plague may be a category unto itself):
1. blood
4. wild beasts
7. hail
2. frogs
5. pestilence
8. locusts
3. lice
6. boils
9. darkness
10. death of firstborn
Using this analytic device and dividing the first nine plagues into groups of three, we are able to discern certain patterns or characteristics of the system as a whole.
First, we will note similarities between the first, second and third plague of each respective group. This method forces us to recognize that the “strange” phrase ‘come to Pharoh’ is not unique to the eighth plague. As our system dictates, this same phrase introduces the second plague in each of the sub-sets (the plague of frogs, second in the order of plagues and second of the first set, as well as pestilence, the fifth in the order of plagues, second in the second set). Interestingly, the first plague of each set (blood, #1; wild beasts, #4; hail, #7) is introduced by the words ‘go to Pharoh,” precisely as we would expect in the case of all of the plagues. What is the difference between these two turns of phrase? Reading the text with careful attention to context, it becomes clear that whenever “come” is used, the destination is the palace. Whenever “go” is used, the destination is the Nile.[3]
For the Egyptians generally, and Pharoh in particular, the Nile represented power. The Nile was the life force of Egypt.
ספר יחזקאל פרק כט
(ב) בֶּן אָדָם שִׂים פָּנֶיךָ עַל פַּרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרָיִם וְהִנָּבֵא עָלָיו וְעַל מִצְרַיִם כֻּלָּהּ:(ג) דַּבֵּר וְאָמַרְתָּ כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יֱדֹוִד הִנְנִי עָלֶיךָ פַּרְעֹה מֶלֶךְ מִצְרַיִם הַתַּנִּים הַגָּדוֹל הָרֹבֵץ בְּתוֹךְ יְאֹרָיו אֲשֶׁר אָמַר לִי יְאֹרִי וַאֲנִי עֲשִׂיתִנִי:
2. 'Son of man, confront Pharoh, King of Egypt, and prophesy regarding him, and all of Egypt; 3. Speak, and say: Thus said the L-rd GOD: behold, I am above you, Pharaoh King of Egypt, the great dragon that lies in the midst of his rivers, that has said: My river is mine, and I have made it for myself. Yechezkel 29:2,3
The Nile was considered a physical representation of the power of Pharoh, a power fueled by delusions of grandeur and steeped in pagan rituals and beliefs. It is therefore of particular interest that the first plague of each “triplet” was announced at the Nile, at the epicenter of this contrived, self-absorbed world, headquarters of Egypt’s cultic activity. In each such instance, God instructs Moshe to “go” – without Him, as it were. Even though God is Omnipresent, filling all of His creation, and there can be no place devoid of His presence, the text “leaves God out of the frame” in the scenes that unfold in the place of pagan worship.[4] There, Moshe and Aharon are sent alone.[5] Notwithstanding God’s assurance when Moshe was hesitant to accept his role as savior (“I will be with you”), God’s Presence is hidden in places of pagan ritual observance.
As we have seen, the second plague in each group of three is characterized by the phrase “come to Pharoh”. Here, the meaning may be more accurately expressed as “come with me to Pharoh”. In this case, the implication is that God will accompany Moshe. The destination is the palace, and we are to understand that God is manifest at these meetings.
Regarding the third plague of each set, there is no warning: Pharoh is no longer involved.[6]
Thus we see that Rabbi Yehuda’s system of breaking the plagues into groups of three is more than a convenient mnemonic device to help us remember the plagues in their proper order. The similarities and differences between the plagues take on new significance when the pattern is discerned. However, this system goes even further, affording deeper insight into the nature of the plagues themselves, and the entire process of leaving Egypt.
The first plague of each set (blood, wild beasts and hail) may be seen as an invasion of Egyptian territory. Most notably, in the first plague the Nile itself was struck; the image of the Egyptian life-force bleeding was certainly not lost on the pagan Egyptians. These three plagues were an annoyance; the Egyptians were made to feel uncomfortable in a general sense, but were more of a public than a private nuisance as compared to the third plague in each triplet. The third plague of each set (lice, boils, blinding darkness) came without warning, neither at the banks of the Nile nor in the palace. They simply arrived. These third plagues were a punishment for ignoring the first two in each triplet, hence no warning and no chance to reverse or avoid the punishment was offered.[7] These three plagues were personal afflictions, visited upon each and every Egyptian.
Rav Shimshon ben Raphael Hirsch[8] explains that the first plague in each triplet was designed to make the Egyptians feel like strangers in their own land, upending the most basic governing principles that ordered their world. The second plague in each triplet was designed to counter the feeling of superiority that lies at the core of being a slave-owner. These plagues were most closely involved with possessions (the frogs infested the Egyptians’ homes and spoiled their bread, the pestilence killed their herds, and the locusts wiped out their crops). The third plague of each group was essentially different: There were lessons to be learned from the first two plagues in each set – moral lessons, social values, philosophical tenets. The third plague in each set was a punishment for having neglected to heed the lessons of the two preceding plagues, and therefore each of these plagues contains an element of physical torture.
When Moshe and Aharon were sent to perform the first in each group of plagues, we understand why they were “sent”. Regarding the third plague in each group, no warning was forthcoming. But is there something objectively different about the nature of the second plague in each group, where God invites Moshe to join him, “come to Pharoh”? What was the purpose of such an invitation? Was there something about these plagues that made it appropriate for them to be initiated at the place? Moreover, as the plagues progress, why is Moshe allowed to continue to come to the palace and torment the monarch? The Ohr Hachaim Hakadosh points out that Pharoh and the palace were surely well protected; the fact that Moshe walked in unmolested is part of what intimidated Pharoh. Moshe did not seek permission; he entered unannounced. Pharoh’s bodyguards quivered, his guard dogs whimpered, and this only added to Pharoh’s humiliation.[9]
This abrupt treatment of Pharoh is not echoed by all commentaries. Rashi, for one, was of the opinion that Pharoh should be treated with respect.[10] Rabbi Soloveitchik followed this line of reasoning and took it a few steps further. He explained that there was a schism running through the personality of Pharoh. While he was certainly an evil despot, he was also something else: a person, a human being, a father. Even Pharoh was created in God’s image:
"Bo el Paroh" (come to Pharoh) is different from the wording used in the Torah in Sedra Va'era when G-d sent Moshe to confront Pharoh for the first plague of blood at the Nile River. There, we find the word lech (go)… The words bo or lech are characteristic of the message...Moshe was told to approach Pharoh as the emperor and also to approach "another" Pharoh: the private person, the individual. When he approached Pharoh as the king [lech el Paroh], he met him at the Nile, the symbol of power in Egypt. "Address yourself to the power-oriented Pharoh at the source of power, the Nile. Stop him; block him. Tell him there are forces stronger (than he). Place yourself strongly in front of him and protest!" [Elsewhere], we find the word bo used: "Go into the king in [his home] … whe[re] he is an ordinary man, a person, a father. Tell him how wrong it is to throw a child into the water. Tell him about Avraham, about morality. Perhaps he will respond." There is a spark of good even in the most wicked. We use the word bo when we ask someone to come closer.[11] Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik
There are times that require confrontation, challenge, even battle. There are times that require a different approach, a person-to-person approach, an appeal to the other’s sense of decency. The plan regarding Pharoh was a dual plan: He was challenged publicly, his beloved Nile turned to blood, and he was approached privately, when he could let his guard down, when his subjects were not watching, when he might be persuaded to do the right thing.
Judaism believes that every mortal king’s rule is a gift from God; hence, the blessing one recites when seeing a king: “Blessed are You, God, King of the Universe, who has given of His glory to flesh and blood. [12]” In his palace, away from the corrupt, delusional pagan cult of the Nile, Pharoh was treated with respect, treated as a king. God, as it were, accompanied Moshe to the palace, and together they attempted to connect with the tzelem Elokim hiding inside Pharoh the man. Moshe reached out to a man who may have been to him as a father or brother. During his early years, had Moshe spoken to this man about morals, beliefs, aspirations? Had they discussed Moshe’s emerging sense of identity, his spiritual awakening? Now, Moshe spoke with him again, hoping to strike a chord buried deep within. Instead, Moshe found a man who had deaf ears and a hardened heart. His pleas went unheeded. Pharoh was offered the opportunity to rise above, to respond with the greatness and grandeur befitting all children of God, especially a king.
Sadly, Pharoh did not respond to this type of plea any more than he did to intimidation or to fear. Striking the Nile made no impression on him; when the curtain was drawn back and he was revealed to all as a man, not a god or a wizard, he did not succumb. Words spoken to his very humanity, in the palace, in his home where his children laughed and played, in the presence of his Creator and true source of his dominion, did not sway him. Consequently, he lost not only his slaves, but his kingdom. The stage for the tenth, most tragic plague, was set by Pharoh’s own intransigence, and he would lose everything.
[1] The Ktav V’kabalah (Shmot 10:1) explains that the torah does not record the entire conversation, but God did say more to Moshe that what is recorded.
הכתב והקבלה על שמות פרק י פסוק א
(א) בא אל פרעה. מקרא קצר הוא וחסר לשון, ואמרת אליו,
[2] The earliest source for this teaching is found in the Sifri Parshat Ki Tavo section 5
ספרי פרשת תבא פיסקא ה
ר' יהודה היה נותן בהם סימנים דצ"ך עד"ש באח”ב
[3] See Baal Haturim, Sh’mot 10:1
בעל הטורים על שמות פרק י פסוק א
(א) בא אל פרעה - כשהיה אומר לו לבא לביתו היה אומר לו בא וכשהיה אומר לו לילך אליו המימה היה אומר לו לך.
[4] See comments of Daat Zkeinim M’baalei Hatosfot, Sh’mot 8:16
דעת זקנים מבעלי התוספות על שמות פרק ח פסוק טז
השכם - תמוה מאי שנא דבמקום אחד כתיב בא ובמקום אחר כתיב השכם. ושמעתי מהרב יצחק ז"ל דבא משמע בא עמי ואלך עמך ובמקום אחר שכתוב השכם כתיב הנה יוצא המימה פי' לעשות צרכיו ואין זה דרך כבוד שתלך שם שכינה.
[5] In the first and fourth plagues, the text specifically refers to the Nile. In the case of the eighth plague, this context is inferred: In the fourth plague (8:16), the text reads, “God said to Moshe, 'Get up early in the morning, and confront Pharoh when he goes out to the water.” Getting up early was necessary, for that was the time that Pharoh went to the Nile. In the seventh plague the word Nile is missing, “9:13 God told Moshe to get up early in the morning and confront Pharaoh,” but Moshe is told to get up early, presumably again to go to the Nile. See comments of the Ramban on Sh’mot 8:15.
רמב"ן על שמות פרק ח פסוק טו
ואמר במקצת המכות השכם בבקר הנה יוצא המימה, ועל דרך הפשט היה בעת צאת המלכים בבקר להשתעשע על המים, וצוה הקב"ה למשה שילך שם והטעם, כי בדם בעבור היותה המכה הראשונה רצה שיעשנה לעיניו ובלי יראה ממנו וזה טעם ונצבת לקראתו (לעיל ז טו), והתיצב לפני פרעה (פסוק טז), שיעמוד כנגדו ביד רמה וכן במכת הערוב נאמר השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה הנה יוצא המימה ובברד (להלן ט יג) השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה, והוא גם כן בצאתו המימה, כי הערוב והברד אשר בהן המיתה והעונש לבני אדם רצה הקב"ה שיהיה לעיני כל העם, כי בצאת המלך המימה ילכו מרבית העם אחריו, והנה יתרה אותו לעיניהם אולי יצעקו אל אדוניהם לשוב מדרכו הרעה, ואם לא יעשו כן יהיו חייבין להענש אבל בשאר המכות די בהתראת המלך, ועל כן נאמר בהן בא אל פרעה (לעיל ז כו, להלן ט א, י א), שיבא אל היכלו, ולא הזכיר בכנים ובשחין כן, בעבור שהוצרך אהרן להכות בעפר, והיכל המלך אין שם עפר כי היא רצפת בהט ושש, וכן הוצרך משה לזרוק הפיח השמימה והנה עשו אלו השתים בפני פרעה בהיותו בחצר גינת ביתן המלך או כיוצא בו:
[6] See comments of Rashbam Sh’mot 7:26
רשב"ם על שמות פרק ז פסוק כו
(כו) ויאמר ה' אל משה בא אל פרעה - שני פעמים היה משה מתרה את פרעה בשני מכות ובשלישית לא היה מתרה. וכן כל הסדר (בכל שלש' סבות אינו מתרה בשלישית) בדם ובצפרדע התרה בכנים לא התרה. בערוב ובדבר התרה. בשחין לא התרה. בברד ובארבה התרה. בחשך לא התרה:
[7] Many commentaries make this observation. See Chizkuni Sh’mot 8:15, Commentary of the Baali Hatosfot 7:25, Commentary of the Rosh 6:3, Rabbenu Bachya 10:1.
חזקוני על שמות פרק ח פסוק טו
וכן היה הסדר בשתים היה מתרה ובשלישית מכה בלא התראה. דכיון שחטא אדם ושנה נעשה לו כהיתר, מה תועלת יש בהתראתו מאחר שלא יחזור בו. ועוד כי כנים חושך שחין שהיו מכות שלישיות הם מכות הוות ולא ישוב באזהרתם, ולפיכך שהיו משולשות ר' יהודה היה נותן בהם סימנים דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב. רק במכת בכורות ששתפה עם שלש אחרונות שאין נכון לקבוע תיבה בשביל אות אחת. וי"מ נתן בהם סימנים שלא יאמרו העולם עקר הוייתן בסדר תהלים, ושם אינו מונה המכות על הסדר שמונה אותם כאן.
פירוש בעלי התוספות על שמות פרק ז פסוק כה
ותירץ ה"ר יוסף בכור שור לפי שלא הוצרכו התראה. שבלא התראה באות ורגילות לבא. אבל שאר מכות שאין רגילות לבא לעולם התרה עליהם. וזהו הסימן דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב פי' עד"ש ערוב דבר בהתראה. שחין שהיתה שלישית בלא התראה. דצ"ך דם צפרדע בהתראה. כנים בלא התראה שהיתה שלישית. באח"ב פי' ברד ארבה בהתראה. חשך בלא התראה וזהו באח"ב ולכך נתן בהם ר' יהודה סימנין בג' תיבות. דצ"ך ע"י אהרן. עד"ש ע"י משה. וע"י הקב"ה באח"ב. עוד י"ל טעמא שלא התרו בו בג' מכות לפי שמי שלקה ושנה בה מכניסין אותו לכיפה בלא התראה לפי' לא התרוהו במכה שלישית ורביעית ובחמשית התרוהו ובששית לא התרוהו וכן כולם:
פירוש הרא"ש על שמות פרק ו פסוק ג
איתא בהגדה דליל פסח ר' יהודה היה נותן בהם סימנים דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב. מה ראה ר' יהודה לתת הסימנים הללו והלא מי שיראה סדר המכות בפסוק יכול לעשות כמוהו. וי"ל דהסימן בא להראות לנו שכל מכה שלישית היתה בלא התראה כנים שחין חשך ובכל ב' הראשונות מלקין ואין מלקין בלא התראה לכן דם צפרדע בהתראה. שלישי' בלא התראה כדאמרי' לקה ושנה כונסין אותו לכיפה ואתי כמה דאיתמר כיפה אין צריך התראה וכן שחין חשך בלא התראה. וקשה למה צריך בכל ראש שלישית ושלישית ב' התראות בהתראת דם צפרדע סגי. י"ל כל שלישית ושלישית מכות חדשות בפני עצמן לכך צריך לכל שלישית שתי התראות שפרעה היה סבור שלא ישובו עוד כיון שלא הוזהר פעם ראשונה. א"נ ג' ראשונות ע"י אהרן ג' שניות על ידי משה ג' שלישיות על ידי הקב"ה וא' ע"י כולם ועל שהיו חלוקות הוזקקו התראות חדשות על ידי הקב"ה דבר חשך מכת בכורות ע"י משה ערוב ברד ארבה דצ"ך ע"י אהרן שחין ע"י שלשתם. אותם דאהרן היו מן הארץ לפי שלא היה מעלתו כ"כ אותם דמשה מאויר אותם דהקב"ה משמים וארץ ומאויר שחין מכל.
רבינו בחיי על שמות פרק י פסוק א
ויאמר ה' אל משה בא אל פרעה כי אני הכבדתי את לבו ואת לב עבדיו וגו' - ודרשו רז"ל כי עשר מכות דצ"ך עד"ש באח"ב כמו שהם מסודרות בתורה כסדר הזה היו השתים בהתראה והשלישית שלא בהתראה, ד"צ בהתראה, ך' בלא התראה ע"ד בהתראה, ש' בלא התראה, ב"א בהתראה, ח' בלא התראה, מכת בכורות שהיא העשירית בהתראה כי יחזור לסדור הראשון, זה דרשו רז"ל והפרשיות מוכיחות כן:
ואם תסתכל בכתובים בכל הפרשיות תמצא כי השתים שהן בהתראה באחת יאמר התיצב לפני פרעה ובשניה יאמר בא אל פרעה. התחיל במכת הדם לך אל פרעה בבקר ונצבת לקראתו על שפת היאור ובמכת צפרדעים הזכיר בא אל פרעה, מכת הכנים אין שם התראה, ומכאן דרשו רז"ל מי שלקה ושנה שוב אין מתרין אותו. במכת הערוב חזר לסדורו הראשון והזכיר שם השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה הנה יוצא המימה, ובמכת הדבר הזכיר בא אל פרעה, מכת השחין אין שם התראה. במכת הברד חזר לסדורו הראשון והזכיר שם השכם בבקר והתיצב לפני פרעה, ובמכת הארבה שבכאן הזכיר בא אל פרעה, מכת חשך אין שם התראה:
וע"כ נראה לי לפרש כי משה היה מודיעו המכה והיה עושה לו התראה פעם אחת על היאור ופעם שנית בהיכלו, וענין בא אל פרעה שיזכירו הכתובים בכל פעם ופעם באורו שיכנס בהיכלו, והכתובים מוכיחים כן כי מעת שהתרה לו במכת הדם על שפת היאור הגיד הכתוב כי מיד נכנס פרעה אל היכלו שנאמר ויבא אל ביתו ולא שת לבו גם לזאת, וטעם הדבר שהיו כל ההתראות כסדור הזה התראה אחת על יאורו והתראה אחרת בהיכלו להורות על ענשו וגאותו וגאונו כי היה מתגאה על יאורו כענין שכתוב (יחזקאל כט) לי יאורי ואני עשיתיני, והיה מתגאה בהיכלו והוא שכתוב ויבא אל ביתו, יאמר כי מצד שנכנס להיכלו ונתגאה בו היה בז לדברי משה ולא שת לבו גם לזאת,
[8] Commentary of Rav Shimshon ben Raphael Hirsch on Sh’mot 7:15
[9] Ohr Hachaim, Sh’mot 9:1
אור החיים על שמות פרק ט פסוק א
(א) בא אל פרעה כלל זה בידך כל מקום שיאמר בא אל פרעה יכוין לומר לו שיכנס אל טרקלין שלו בלא השאלת רשות, הגם שהיו לו כמשפט המלכים שומרי הבית אף על פי כן יעול ויכנס אצלו מבלי שאלת רשות, וכן היה עושה, כאומרם ז"ל ו כי כמה שומרים היו לפרעה מזוינים ואריות וכלבים והיה נכנס באין מונע ומצאתי ראיה ברורה לדבריהם ז"ל, ממה שאמר פרעה למשה השמר לך וגו' אל תוסף ראות פני וגו' (להלן י כח), כי למה הוצרך פרעה להתרות במשה והיה לו לצוות לעבדיו שומרי הבית, כי כן מנהג המלכים להעמיד שומרי המלך, ולהם יצוה שלא יניחוהו ליכנס, אלא ודאי כי לא עמדו כנגדו ואפילו אריות וזה נס עצום, לזה היה ה' צריך לומר לו בא אל פרעה פירוש הכנס ועלה אליו ולא תשים לבך למונע בעולם ובזמן שהיה פרעה יוצא המימה היה אומר לו לך אל פרעה, כי שם אין שומרים לירא מהם להצטרך לומר אליו עלה אליו, אלא לצד שאין זמן זה ראוי להליכה כי הוא מוציא בולעו התעוב ואינו מהמוסר, לזה אומר לו לך אף על פי כן:
[10] See Rashi Sh’mot 6:13
רש"י על שמות פרק ו פסוק יג
ואל פרעה מלך מצרים - צום עליו לחלוק לו כבוד בדבריהם זהו מדרשו. (ע"ע רש"י ה:ג, יא:ח)
[11] From a public lecture delivered in January, 1975. I have collected, and hope to publish, much of the material surrounding the Pesach Haggadah taught at these lectures.
[12] See Shulchan Oruch, Orach Chaim, Section 224, based on Talmud Bavli Brachot 58a.
הרואה מלך ישראל אומר: בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה ‘אֱלֹהֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם שֶׁחָלַק מִכְּבוֹדוֹ לִירֵאָיו :הרואה מלך מאומות העולם אומר:
בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה ה ‘אֱלֹהֵינוּ מֶלֶךְ הָעוֹלָם שֶׁנָּתַן מִכְּבוֹדוֹ לְבָשָׂר וָדָם: שו"ע אורח חיים - סימן רכד: (ח) על המלכים אומר: בא"י אלהינו מלך העולם שחלק מכבודו ליראיו; ועל מלכי עובדי כוכבים אומר, ברוך שנתן מכבודו לבשר ודם:(ט) מצוה להשתדל לראות מלכים, אפילו מלכי אומות העולם:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)