[Par-lite] for Parshat Va'era - shiur #1

[Menachem Leibtag]

*********************************************
***

THE TANACH STUDY CENTER  www.tanach.org

In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag

Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag

*********************************************
***

 

      PARSHAT VA'ERA  --   "ANI HASHEM"  -
Part One

 

      Should Bnei Yisrael's redemption from
slavery be 'unconditional'?  

      According to God's original promise to
Avraham Avinu at Brit Bein ha'Btarim
(Breishit 15:13-15), it certainly seems that
way. 

    Furthermore, the opening lines of Parshat
Va'era also leave us with this impression
that the forthcoming redemption will be
unconditional - after all, could God have any
higher expectations from a nation that had
endured so many years of oppression?

    In the following shiur, we re-examine
those psukim (i.e. Shmot 6:2-9) - to show how
and why Israel's redemption from Egypt
emerges as a more 'reciprocal' process.

    

INTRODUCTION 

      In our study last week of the 'burning
bush' narrative, we explained how Moshe
Rabeinu received a 'double mission' - as God
instructed him to both:

* INFORM Bnei Yisrael that God has come to
fulfill His promise to the Avot to take them
to Eretz Canaan.

AND

* ORDER Pharaoh to allow Bnei Yisrael to
journey a three day distance into the desert
- to worship their God.

 

    At first glance, Moshe's mission to
Pharaoh appears to be much more difficult
than his mission to Bnei Yisrael.  After all,
Moshe must convince the Egyptian ruler to do
something against his will; while Bnei
Yisrael need only to be told 'good tidings'. 

      However, as the story continues, we
will see how Moshe's 'mission' to Bnei
Yisrael becomes no less difficult, and how
that mission emerges as a primary theme of
Sefer Shmot!

    To explain how and why, we must first
consider the setting as Parshat Va'era
begins. 

 

GETTING BETTER, OR GETTING WORSE

      Recall from Parshat Shmot, how Bnei
Yisrael immediately believed Moshe's tidings
of their forthcoming redemption:

"...and the people believed that God had come
to redeem His people..."  (see 4:29-31). 

 

      However, this initial enthusiasm
quickly turned bitter after Pharaoh doubled
their workload (in reaction to Moshe's
opening request /see 5:18-21).
Understandably, the people accuse Moshe -
their new leader - for aggravating their
condition; whereupon Moshe turns to God in
prayer, asking:

"Why have you made things worse for this
people, why have you sent me!  From the time
I have gone to Pharaoh to speak in Your Name,
their situation has only gotten worse, and
You have not saved Your nation!" (5:22).

 

      It is precisely at this point when
Parshat Va'era opens, i.e. as Moshe awaits
God's answer concerning what to tell the
people. As the people raise a rather
'legitimate' complaint, Moshe needs to know
how to respond.

      Note how God's response to this
complaint is found in the opening eight
psukim of Parshat Va'era (i.e. 6:2-9) - and
how it divides into two sections:

    1) What God tells Moshe (see 6:2-5), and
hence:

    2) What Moshe must tell Bnei Yisrael (see
6:6-8).

      

    In our shiur, we will focus on God's
answer to Bnei Yisrael (i.e. 6:6-8), while
our additional shiur on Parshat Va'era (to
follow) will discuss how and why God first
mentions "brit Avot" in his preliminary
remarks to Moshe in 6:2-5.]

 

ANI HASHEM

      Review the opening line of God's
response to Moshe (see 6:2), as it appears to
contain a rather superfluous statement:

"And Elokim spoke to Moshe, and told him: ANI
HASHEM".  

 

    Even though Moshe Rabeinu already knows
who God is (see Shmot 3:6-7 & 3:13-15),
nonetheless, God finds its necessary to
preface his response with this statement of
"Ani Hashem".

 

      Similarly, the message that God
instructs Moshe to convey to Bnei Yisrael
begins (and ends!) with this same statement
of 'ANI HASHEM' (see 6:6-8).  To clarify
this, note our emphasis of this point as we
quote these psukim:

    "Therefore, tell Bnei Yisrael: 

    ANI HASHEM,

    and I will take them out from their
suffering in Egypt...

    and I will save them from their
enslavement, 

    and I shall redeem them with an
outstretched arm....

    and I shall take them for Me as My Nation

    and I will be their God... then they
shall know that:

    ANI HASHEM ELOKEICHEM 

    who has taken them out of Egypt. 

And I will take them to the Land... 

and I will give it to them as an
inheritance...

      ANI HASHEM." 

     (see 6:6-8, read carefully!)

 

      Clearly, God wants Bnei Yisrael to hear
this 'message' of "Ani Hashem".  But how does
this 'statement' answer the people's
complaint?  Would the repetition of this
phrase, together with yet another promise of
redemption lighten their workload? 

[Recall, Bnei Yisrael never asked for
redemption, they simply desired less work!
(see 2:23)]

      

    As we see in the next pasuk, this message
did not convince them, and precisely for this
reason - that it did not alleviate their
heavy workload:

"And Moshe spoke these words to Bnei Yisrael,
but they did not listen to Moshe, due to
their crushed spirit and their hard labor".
(see 6:9).

      

      So what was the purpose of God's
message of "Ani Hashem", if it didn't work?

 

A STATEMENT, or A COMMAND?

      To answer this question, we contend
that the phrase 'ANI HASHEM' (in the context
of these psukim) should not be understood as
simply a 'statement' - promising imminent
redemption, but rather as a 'command to
accept Hashem' - i.e. demanding improved
behavior - to enable redemption!

    

    Even though this interpretation may not
appear to be the simple meaning of this
phrase, a careful reading of this entire
section in Sefer Shmot, with a little help
from Sefer Yechezkel, will help us prove this
conclusion.

    To do so, let's take a careful look at
Bnei Yisrael's response (in 6:9) to God's
message (in 6:6-8):

"And Moshe relayed this [message] to Bnei
Yisrael...

- ve'lo SHAM'U el Moshe mi'kotzer ruach
u'm'avoda kasha-

But they did not LISTEN to Moshe, due to
their crushed spirits and hard work.  (see
6:9).

 

      In our quotation of this pasuk, we have
translated the phrase of "ve'lo shamu" as
they did not 'listen'.  However, as we shall
now explain, this translation is problematic.

 

'TO BELIEVE' OR 'TO OBEY'?

      To interpret the phrase "ve-lo SHAM'U",
let's consider the possible meanings of the
verb "lishmoa", which can imply to either
hear; comprehend; listen, or obey - and
contemplate how it would relate to the
context of these psukim:

 

* They did not HEAR what Moshe said.

That can't be its meaning in this pasuk, as
they obviously heard what Moshe said. [If
not, he could have simply raised his voice,
and repeated it again.]  

 

* They did not COMPREHEND what he said.

This would also seem unlikely, for nothing in
Moshe's statement seems particularly complex
or intellectually demanding.

 

* They did not PAY ATTENTION to what Moshe
told them.

Based on its context, this seems to be the
simplest understanding; the problem only
being that this is not what the word "sham'u"
usually implies. 

 

* They did not BELIEVE (or accept) what Moshe
told them.

Even though this is the popular
interpretation (of this pasuk), this
translation is problematic as well, for the
Torah should have used the phrase "ve-lo
he'eminu", as this is the word Chumash
usually employs to describe belief - just as
it did to describe Bnei Yisrael's original
belief in God's first promise of redemption -
see 4:30-31.

 

* They did not OBEY what Moshe told them.

Although this is the most common translation
of 've-lo sham'u' elsewhere in Chumash [see
for example Devarim 28:15 & Vayikra 26:14],
such a translation in our context seems
entirely untenable, as Moshe's remarks
contained no commandment or imperative for
the people to obey!  

    Or did they? 

    

    Based on the above analysis, the best
translation for "ve-lo sham'u" would be -
that the people did not 'obey'  -  but if so,
it would require that we identify some sort
of commandment in God's statement to the
people, as recorded in 6:6-8.  

    To explain how and why the statement of
ANI HASHEM could be understood as a
commandment - that must be obeyed; we must
study a parallel source that describes these
same events, as recorded in the book of
Yechezkel.

 

A PROOF FROM YECHEZKEL

[Before continuing, it is recommended that
you first read Yechezkel 20:1-12 and
carefully compare it to Shmot 6:2-13; noting
the obvious textual parallels, e.g. 20:5-6 w/
3:6-8.]

 

      Yechezkel chapter 20 opens in the
seventh year [i.e. seven years after the
Exile of King Yehoyachin and the aristocracy
from Jerusalem], as the elders of Yehuda (the
leaders of the Exile in Bavel) visit
Yechezkel to inquire in regard to their
predicament. 

[Based on chapter 28 in Yirmiyahu, we can
assume that rumors of Bavel's imminent fall
are spreading (as Egypt will come to their
rescue/ see also Yirmiyahu 37:1-10), kindling
[false] hope among the people that God may
soon redeem the Exile and return them to
Jerusalem.]

  

      In response to their inquiry, God tells
Yechezkel that the people need to hear rebuke
(rather than 'good tidings' /see 2:4).

      In that rebuke, God instructs Yechezkel
to remind the people that they are not worthy
of redemption, just as their forefathers in
Egypt did not deserve redemption!  [See
20:5-10.]  

    As your review these psukim, note how
Yechezkel describes the set of events that
took place just prior to the Exodus, and
their obvious parallels to the opening psukim
of Parshat Va'era:

"And you shall say to them... on the day that
I chose Israel ... [va-ivada lahem -] when I
made Myself known to them in the land of
Egypt... and I stretched out My Hand to them
saying ANI HASHEM ELOKEICHEM". 

    [Compare with Shmot 6:3 & 6:6]

"... on that same day ["nasa'ti et yadi"] I
lifted out My Hand  to take them out of Egypt
into a land flowing with milk and honey"
(Yechezkel 20:5-6),

     [Compare with Shmot 6:8 and 3:7-8].

 

    Note especially the repetition of the
phrase of ANI HASHEM as well as "ve-lo avu
l'shmo'ah".

 

TAKING 'EGYPT' OUT OF THE JEWS

      However, the most important piece of
information in these psukim, that (for some
reason) were left out of Sefer Shmot, is the
COMMANDMENT that God had given Bnei Yisrael
at that time:

    "And I said to them [at the time of
Yetziat Mitzrayim]: -

"Each man must rid himself of his detestable
ways and not DEFILE himself with the fetishes
of Egypt - [for] ANI HASHEM ELOKEICHEM"  (see
20:7).

 

"But they REBELLED against Me -'ve-lo avu
liSHMOA eilai' - and they did not want to
listen to Me (i.e. obey) - for no one rid
himself from his detestable ways, nor did
anyone give up the fetishes of Egypt, and I
resolved to pour out My anger upon them..."
(see 20:8).

 

    It becomes quite clear from Yechezkel,
that when God told Moshe to tell Bnei Yisrael
ANI HASHEM (as recorded in Parshat Va'era),
this included an implicit COMMAND as well -
to rid themselves from Egyptian culture- a
command which Bnei Yisrael DID NOT OBEY.  

      Much to our amazement, Sefer Yechezkel
states explicitly that which Sefer Shmot only
alludes to.  God had called upon Bnei Yisrael
to repent prior to the Exodus, to cleanse
themselves from the "tum'a" of their Egyptian
culture - in preparation for their
redemption.  Unfortunately, at that time Bnei
Yisrael did not OBEY ["ve-lo avu liSHMOA" /
see 20:8] and thus deserved to be destroyed
in the land of Egypt.

    Nevertheless, as Yechezkel explains in
the next pasuk, the redemption process did
continue, but it was only for the 'sake of
God's Name' (see Yechezkel 20:9-10).

[These psukim in Yechezkel support the
popular Zohar that explains how Bnei Yisrael
in Egypt had reached the 49th level of
'tum'a' before the redemption began.  See
Further Iyun section for additional sources
that are based on (or quote) these psukim in
Yechezkel.]

 

      Thus, these psukim in Yechezkel can
help us understand the deeper meaning of the
phrase 'Ani Hashem' in Parshat Va'era.  God's
instruction to Moshe to tell Bnei Yisrael -
'Ani Hashem' - implies not only that they
must accept God, but they must also reject
any other gods (and/or culture).  Basically,
God is telling His nation that He will indeed
redeem them from Egypt, as they request; but
this redemption demands that they become a
'committed partner' in this relationship.

      If this understanding is correct, then
Bnei Yisrael's response of "ve-lo sham'u el
Moshe" could definitely be understood that
'they did not OBEY' - for they rebelled
against God (as Yechezkel explained)
continuing their evil ways by clinging to
their Egyptian culture! 

 

A LOGICAL 'KAL VA-CHOMER'

      Additional support for this
interpretation [that they did not 'obey'] can
be inferred from the next three psukim that
follow in Parshat Va'era:

"Then God told Moshe, go speak to Pharaoh...
that he should SEND Bnei Yisrael from his
land.   [Clearly, a command!]

 

Then, Moshe retorted [employing a 'kal
va-chomer'], saying: 

"hein Bnei Yisrael LO SHAM'U eilai - [If even
B.Y. did not 'listen' to me] - ve-eich
YISHMA'ENI Pharaoh - why should Pharaoh
'obey' me?" (see 6:10-12).

 

      As you review this pasuk in Hebrew,
note how the Torah uses the word 'sham'u' on
each side of the 'kal va-chomer'. 

    In the context of Pharaoh's refusal to
comply with God's command - 'sham'u'
definitely means to OBEY - for Moshe commands
Pharaoh to grant Bnei Yisrael permission to
leave Egypt (to worship their God).
Therefore, for this 'kal va-chomer' to make
sense, the verb 'sham'u' in both halves of
the pasuk must carry the same meaning.  Thus,
if 'sham'u' in the second half of the pasuk
means 'obey', then 'sham'u' in first half of
the pasuk - in reference to Bnei Yisrael -
must also mean to OBEY. 

    In other words, the 'kal va-chomer'
implies:" Why should Pharaoh OBEY me, if Bnei
Yisrael did not OBEY me!" 

 

      Once again, we find proof that the
phrase 've-lo sham'u' in 6:9 should be
understood as: Bnei Yisrael did not obey.

 

TO KNOW or TO INTERNALIZE 

    Based to this conclusion, "ANI HASHEM"
must now be understood as a command; and not
as a statement (as we originally assumed). In
this context, "Ani Hashem" encompasses much
more than pure intellectual knowledge, rather
it constitutes a precept that must be
INTERNALIZED - and hence requires the
rejection of any other god.  

As Parshat Va'eyra begins, Moshe Rabeinu has
been charged with the responsibility to
become an 'educator', and not simply the
bearer of good tidings.  In this capacity, he
must help prepare Bnei Yisrael for their
redemption - by changing their ignoble
culture - leading them in the path of God.
It will also remain as his primary job for
the next forty years!

 

THE FIRST TWO 'DIBROT'

    This interpretation can help us
appreciate the deeper meaning of the first
two of the Ten Commandments that Bnei Yisrael
receive when they arrive at Har Sinai.

The first commandment: "ANOCHI HASHEM
ELOKECHA asher HOTZEITICHA me-eretz
Mitzrayim..." (see 20:2-3, compare w/6:6!) is
simply a more emphatic form of "Ani Hashem";
and the next commandment: "lo yihiyeh lachem
elohim acherim al panai..." - not to follow
any other gods - reiterates this warning that
accepting God requires the rejection of
decedent cultures.  

    This may also explain why some
commentators consider Anochi and Lo Yihiyeh
as one commandment, for the first statement
automatically implies the second (like two
sides of the same coin)! 

      Even though Bnei Yisrael did not
internalize this 'commandment' of ANI HASHEM
before they left Egypt (as 6:9 implies), as
God had hoped; their redemption process would
not be complete until they do - as will
unfold in the events that follow in the rest
of Chumash.

A DIFFICULT MISSION

    From this perspective, Moshe's mission to
Bnei Yisrael becomes more difficult than his
mission to Pharaoh.  His assignment involves
not only informing the people, but also
EDUCATING them - to prepare them for their
redemption.  Just as Pharaoh must be
convinced to recognize God, Bnei Yisrael must
be convinced that they must become worthy for
their redemption by God. 

      This interpretation can also explain
the interesting wording of God's response to
Moshe's objection in 6:11-12: 

"Then God spoke to Moshe & Aharon, and
COMMANDED them [va-yetzavem] TO Bnei Yisrael
AND TO Pharaoh the king of Egypt to take Bnei
Yisrael out of Egypt" (6:13).

 

      God once again gives Moshe a double
mission - to command Pharaoh to allow them to
leave, AND to command Bnei Yisrael to 'become
worthy' of that redemption.

      [See Ramban's interpretation of this
pasuk!]

 

SOME HELP FROM SEFER VAYIKRA

      So what were Bnei Yisrael doing in
Egypt that was so terrible?  Considering that
these events took place before the Torah was
given, what did they need to do 'teshuva'
from?

      A possible answer can be found in
Parshat Acharei Mot, where we find once again
an interesting textual and thematic parallel
to Yechezkel chapter 20 and Shmot chapter 6.


    In Vayikra chapter 18 (which just so
happens to be the Torah reading for Yom
Kippur afternoon, and not by chance), God
bids Bnei Yisrael not to follow the corrupt
lifestyle of the Egyptians.  Note once again
the repetition in these psukim of the phrase
'ANI HASHEM':

"And God spoke to Moshe: speak to Bnei
Yisrael and TELL them ANI HASHEM! 

    Do not act as the Egyptians do... and do
not follow their customs.  Follow My laws
instead... for ANI HASHEM ELOKEICHEM.  

    Keep My laws, for by them man lives...
ANI HASHEM" 

                        (see Vayikra 18:1-5).

 

      This short introduction is followed by
a long list of forbidden marital
relationships [better known as the 'arayot'],
which had apparently become common in the
Egyptian and Canaanite cultures (see
18:24-25!).  Thus, God's call for 'teshuva'
may have included a demand that Bnei
Yisrael's refrain of their decadent Egyptian
lifestyle, and accept instead whatever
mitzvot God may command.

 

A THEME IN SEFER SHMOT

     This interpretation not only helps us
understand the phrase "ve-lo sham'u  el
Moshe" in 6:9, it also explains a whole
series of events that take place up until
Bnei Yisrael arrive at Har Sinai. 

      Recall that God had originally planned
(at the 'sneh') for Bnei Yisrael to travel a
three-day journey directly to Har Sinai
immediately after the Exodus (see 3:12-18).
Instead, they arrive at Har Sinai only some
six weeks later.  Why?

      Based on the excerpt quoted from Sefer
Yechezkel, the answer is quite simple.  As
the prophet explained, God saved Bnei Yisrael
for the 'sake of His Name' - even though they
were undeserving at that time (see 20:8-9).
Hence, the redemption process could not
continue, i.e. Bnei Yisrael cannot travel on
to Har Sinai, until something is done to
improve their spiritual readiness.

      Therefore, even before Bnei Yisrael
leave Egypt, they must offer a special Korban
[Pesach] to affirm their faithfulness.  [See
our TSC shiur on Parshat Bo.]  Then, after
their first 'three-day journey' into the
desert, they must pass the test at 'Mara'
(see 15:22-26), where they are given one more
chance to accept what they had earlier
rejected in Parshat Va'era.  Note what God
commands Bnei Yisrael at MARA:

"And He said - IM SHAMO'A TISHMA - If you
OBEY the voice of the Lord your God, do what
is upright and listen to His commandments,
then the afflictions that I brought upon
Egypt [which you deserved as well!] I will
not bring upon you, for ANI HASHEM, your
Healer" (16:26).

[This topic will be discussed in greater
detail in our shiur on Parshat Beshalach.]

 

      Finally, immediately upon their arrival
at Har Sinai, God again demands as a
PRE-REQUISITE for receiving the Torah a
similar 'pledge of allegiance':

"And now, IM SHAMO'A TISHME'U BE-KOLI - if
you agree to obey My instruction and keep My
covenant..."  (see 19:3-6).

 

      Of course, this time Bnei Yisrael agree
to follow God and 'listen' [obey] to whatever
He may command them (see 19:7-8). 

      Finally, as we explained above, this
explains why the very first DIBUR of the Ten
Commandments is "ANOCHI [=ANI] HASHEM
ELOKECHA who took you out of Egypt - LO
YIHIYEH... Do not have any other gods INSTEAD
of Me" (see 20:2).  

      As we saw in Sefer Yechezkel, these two
statements - ANI HASHEM and LO YIHIYEH - act
as 'two sides of the same coin' - for the
statement of ANI HASHEM automatically implies
that you shall have no other gods.

 

ELIYAHU AT LEIL HA-SEDER

      In closing, the conclusions of this
week's shiur can also help us appreciate our
custom to 'invite' Eliyahu ha-navi to our
'seder table'.  On Pesach night, as we
commemorate the events of Yetziat Mitzrayim,
we conclude the SEDER with our hope for the
final redemption.  However, before we begin
Hallel & Nirtza, we first invite Eliyahu.
Most likely, this custom is based on the
final pasuk of Mal'achi, which promises:

"Behold I am sending you Eliyah the prophet,
BEFORE the great and awesome day of the Lord,
and he will return the hearts of sons to
their fathers, and the hearts of fathers to
their sons, lest I come and smite and land
instead."  

 

      In the final redemption, just as in the
first redemption, our obligation to perform
'teshuva' is as important an ingredient as
God's readiness to redeem us.  After all,
what purpose would there be in our redemption
if we were not ready to fulfill our
covenantal obligations? 

      In order for redemption to succeed, a
constant recognition of ANI HASHEM must
become not only a 'frame of mind', but even
more so, it must become a 'way of life'.

 

                              shabbat shalom,

                              menachem

 

===================

FOR FURTHER IYUN

1. Review Shmot 2:23-25.  Note how Bnei
Yisrael cry to Hashem for salvation.  In your
opinion, does this indicate that they did
teshuva, or was this simply a cry for help.

      See Ibn Ezra (2:23 / aroch), Ramban
(2:25), and Seforno (2:23-24) on these
psukim, noting how they all relate to this
question, and how they all relate to the
psukim in Yechezkel 20:1-9 as well!

 

2. See Seforno's introduction to Sefer Shmot
(in some Chumashim it is found in the first
volume of Sefer Breishit, where Seforno
provides and intro to all five books of
Chumash).

    Note how his commentary on what
transpires in Sefer Shmot is based on what is
described in Yechezkel chapter 20!

    Note also how he relates to this
information in Sefer Yechezkel in his
commentary on almost every pasuk in Shmot
chapter one, as well as his commentary on
2:23-24.

 

3. See Amos 5:18!  There he claims that it
would be better for Bnei Yisrael not to
desire a YOM HASHEM.  Based on the context of
that pasuk (considering the people's behavior
during the time period of Uziyahu) and the
conclusions of this week's shiur, explain
Amos' warning in that pasuk

.     See also Yirmiyahu 29:10-14, and relate
it to the above shiur!

 

ADDITIONAL NOTES AND SOURCES

The Forty-nine 'sha'arei tum'a'

      The concept that Bnei Yisrael plummeted
to the forty-ninth 'gate of impurity' appears
in the Zohar Chadash, vol. 1, Parshat Yitro
52a.  The Zohar there writes that while
Hashem had promised Avraham Avinu only that
He will redeem his offspring from bondage, He
in fact did much more: He took them from the
forty-nine 'gates of impurity' and raised
them to the forty-nine 'gates of wisdom'.
This, explains the Zohar, is why Hashem
constantly reminds Bnei Yisrael, "I am Hashem
your God who took you from Egypt", to
emphasize that He did more than fulfill His
promise to Avraham Avinu.  

      The Zohar adds that the forty-nine days
we count between Pesach and Shavuot
commemorate this elevation from the
forty-nine 'gates of impurity'.  This concept
is developed later by the Ramchal, in Choker
U-mekubal, 18.

"Ve-lo Sham'u El Moshe" (6:9)

      Our explanation, that this pasuk refers
to Bnei Yisrael's unwillingness to give up
their idolatrous practices, appears
explicitly in several Midrashim.  The
Mechilta, Parshat Bo - Mesechta De-pischa 5
and Shemot Rabba 6:5 explain that Bnei
Yisrael could not extricate themselves from
idolatry, and the Midrashim make reference to
Yechezkel 20 as evidence.  Targum Yonatan Ben
Uziel also explains this pasuk as suggesting
Bnei Yisrael's refusal to abandon idolatry,
though he adds as well the element of
'kepidut rucha', anger and frustration.
Perhaps this means that the intensified labor
that resulted from Moshe's initial meeting
with Pharaoh contributed in no small measure
to the people's refusal to heed his call for
teshuva.

      It is worth noting that we find two
different approaches in the Midrashim as to
why Bnei Yisrael resorted to avoda zara:
either for theological reasons, or due to
circumstances they deemed out of their
control.  The Torah Shleima quotes a "Midrash
Aggada" that Bnei Yisrael lacked faith and
claimed that Hashem did not have the ability
to save them.  They thus resorted to avoda
zara, on ideological grounds.  The Midrash
Hagadol, by contrast, records the following
response of Bnei Yisrael to Moshe's call for
their return to monotheism: "Where do you
find a slave who acquires for himself two
masters?  We are slaves to Pharaoh; how can
we violate his decrees - we are afraid!"
Their subjugation to Pharaoh precluded the
possibility of their service to Hashem.

      The Netziv, in his comments to Shmot
13:9, finds what he considers a clearer
source in Chumash for Bnei Yisrael's
involvement in avoda zara.  The pasuk there
instructs them with regard to the mitzva of
tefillin and concludes, "for with a mighty
hand Hashem took you out from Egypt".  The
Netziv explains this clause as a response to
the anticipated question as to why Hashem
must issue so many commandments to ensure
Bnei Yisrael's trust and belief in Him.  He
answers by reminding the people that they
agreed to leave Egypt only after witnessing
Hashem's mighty hand.  Although they happily
welcomed Moshe's initial announcement of
their freedom (4:31), they rejected his
second proclamation because, as we noted in
the shiur, it required them to accept Hashem
as their God.  Only after witnessing the
miracles in Egypt did they agree to forsake
idolatry and accept Hashem. 

 

VE-LO SHAM'U EL MOSHE

      By and large, the "mefarshim al derech
ha-pshat" interpret "ve-lo sham'u el Moshe"
differently.  We list here the three general
directions taken by the mefarshim:

BELIEVE

      They did not believe: We dismissed this
approach in the shiur, but several prominent
mefarshim adopt - either explicitly or
implicitly - this interpretation.  The
Rashbam contrasts the nation's response here
with their reaction to Moshe's initial
announcement, as recorded in Parshat Shmot -
4:31.  Although then, they believed Moshe
("Va-ya'amen ha-am"), having seen their hopes
crushed by the decree of more intensive labor
they no longer believed.  In quoting this
pasuk in Parshat Shmot, the Rashbam may have
implicitly addressed the possible objection
to this approach, as we asked in the shiur:
why did the Torah not say, "Ve-lo he'eminu"?
The answer may be that in that very pasuk the
Torah writes, "va-yishme'u ki pakad Hashem et
Benei Yisrael. "  There, 'va-yishme'u' seems
to parallel 'va-ya'amen', to mean 'they
believed'.  Other mefarshim who claim that
Bnei Yisrael did not believe Moshe include
the Ralbag and Seforno.

PAY ATTENTION

      Another group of mefarshim explain
've-lo sham'u' to mean a rough equivalent of,
'they did not pay attention'.  For one of
several reasons, Bnei Yisrael did not or
could not pay attention to Moshe as he spoke
to them - either because of the pressure of
their workload, their emotional distress, or
because Pharaoh had already ordered them to
disregard the 'words of falsehood' spoken by
Moshe and Aharon (5:9). 

       This approach is taken (though in
slightly different forms) by the Ramban,
Chizkuni, Abarbanel, Netziv and Meshech
Chochma in their commentaries on this pasuk.
One interesting variation of this approach
appears in the work of Rav Hirsch.  He
explains, along the same general lines as our
analysis in the shiur, that in Moshe's speech
he does more than inform the people of
redemption; he charges them with a mission,
the destiny and purpose of Am Yisrael.  Due
to the pressures of their work, however, Bnei
Yisrael had no patience for such lofty ideas
and concepts.  All they could concentrate on
was the immediate tasks at hand; they
therefore could not pay any attention to
Moshe's description of their spiritual
mission as a free nation.

CONSOLATION

      The final approach is that of Rashi:
"They did not accept consolation."  Unlike
our explanation in the shiur, Rashi
apparently understood Moshe's address as
simply an attempt at consoling the people
whose lives had become even more unbearable
as a result of Pharaoh's new decree.  Rashi
expresses this interpretation of the pasuk in
other writings, as well.  In Sefer Hapardes
(compiled by Rashi's students) and in Siddur
Rashi (414), this pasuk is cited as proof
that those who seek to offer consolation
should do so 'me'at me'at', by expressing
modest hopes for better things to come.  In
Rashi's words, one who does not do so: "is
like one who says to a beggar, 'Tomorrow you
will be a king' - he does not believe him."
Here, too, Bnei Yisrael suffered from
physical torment, and Moshe consoles them
with promises of a glorious life as God's
nation in the land of Canaan.  This offered
them little consolation; they wished only for
a respite from their current hardship.

      The Malbim (on our pasuk) explains
along these lines, as well, that Moshe here
was to console Bnei Yisrael, but did not
succeed.

 

TESHUVA IN EGYPT

      In sharp contrast to the line taken in
the shiur, Ibn Ezra in his peirush
Ha-aroch(2:23) says that the words
"Va-yeanchu Bnei Yisrael min ha-avoda
va-yiz'aku" implies that they did do teshuva
and thus were worthy of being redeemed from
Egypt.

 

'Ani Hashem' 

      The centrality of this phrase within
this opening unit of Parshat Va'era is
demonstrated by Nechama Leibowitz (Studies,
Parshat Va'era 1).  She shows that within
this segment, which consists of Hashem's
speech to Moshe (6:2-8), 'Ani Hashem' appears
at either end (6:2&8) as well as in the
middle (6:6).  Clearly, the notion of 'Ani
Hashem' comprises the most important message
Moshe is to convey to Bnei Yisrael at this
point.

      In the shiur we suggest that 'Ani
Hashem' involved an educational message, that
Bnei Yisrael must rid themselves of Egyptian
culture and prepare themselves spiritually
for redemption.  This approach appears in the
works of two twentieth-century writers, Rav
Zalman Sorotzkin (Oznayim La-Torah) and Rav
Yoel Leib Herzog (Imrei Yoel).  They both
claim that 'Ani Hashem' was meant as an
admonishment that Bnei Yisrael relinquish
their attachment to idolatry.  Rav Sorotzkin
adds that Bnei Yisrael could not accept the
fact that the same God who brought about this
bitter exile would also come to their
assistance and redeem them.  They fell under
the influence of pagan ideology and so
believed in the existence of different gods
with different powers.  Moshe was thus to
teach them the message of 'Ani Hashem', that
there is only one God who governs every force
in the universe.  Indeed, the same God who
subjected them to hardship will lead them to
a life of freedom.

      This interpretation of 'Ani Hashem' may
shed light on the passage in the Zohar
mentioned earlier.  The Zohar asks, why does
Hashem so often remind Bnei Yisrael that "Ani
Hashem Elokeichem asher hotzeiti etchem
me-eretz Mitzrayim" (or similar)?  After all,
by taking them out of Egypt, Hashem simply
fulfilled the promise He had made to Avraham;
why does this act merit such emphasis?  The
Zohar answers that these proclamations stress
the fact that Hashem went beyond His promise
to Avraham.  He had promised Avraham only to
redeem his offspring from bondage, not to
raise them from the quagmire of the
forty-nine 'gates of impurity'.  Why must
Hashem emphasize this point?  Is He trying to
'brag'?

      In light of our discussion, the answer
becomes clear.  Hashem constantly reminds
Bnei Yisrael of the commandment He issued to
them when they were in Egypt, 'Ani Hashem' -
the commandment that they failed to heed.  It
is as though He reminds them, "You did not
internalize this message in Egypt, so I must
reiterate it to you again and again!"

      We list here three alternative
explanations that appear in the Midrashim and
mefarshim as to the meaning of 'Ani Hashem'
in this context:

      The Midrash Hagadol and Mechilta
De-Rashbi understand 'Ani Hashem' as a
disclaimer of sorts.  Hashem here declares
that although He knows the future, and thus
foresees Bnei Yisrael's future abandonment of
Hashem, He will nevertheless redeem them.

      Several mefarshim interpret the phrase
as a source of encouragement for Bnei
Yisrael, underscoring Hashem's unlimited
power that enables Him to redeem them.  This
approach appears in various forms in the
commentaries of Rashi, Seforno and Abarbanel.
The Ibn Ezra posits a slight variation of
this approach, that 'Ani Hashem' emphasizes
the nature of the Almighty's promise; as He
is God, Bnei Yisrael may confidently trust
that He will fulfill His guarantee of
redemption.

      The Malbim explains that Hashem here
informs Bnei Yisrael that He will redeem them
with the divine attribute of 'Shem Havaya',
entirely outside the bounds of the natural
order.  Amos Chacham, in Da'at Mikra, takes a
similar approach, as does Rav Chayim Yaakov
Goldvicht (Asufat Ma'archot - Haggada Shel
Pesach, p.113).

 

"Va-yetzavem El Bnei Yisrael." (6:13)

      The glaring problem in this pasuk, as
noted by many commentaries, is the absence of
any content to this 'command' Hashem issued
to Moshe and Aharon.  We claim that this
refers to the spiritual preparation of Bnei
Yisrael for redemption.  This appears
explicitly in two Midrashim - the Mechilta
cited earlier, and the Midrash Lekach Tov on
our pasuk.  This may be the deeper meaning of
two other Midrashim as well.  One Midrash
brought down in the Sefer Ha-mivchar (as
quoted in the Torah Shleima on our pasuk)
says that Moshe commanded Bnei Yisrael to
prepare wood for the construction of the
Mishkan.  This may symbolize Bnei Yisrael's
preparation for hashra'at ha-Shechina -
Hashem's residence within the nation.
Secondly, the Yerushalmi in Masechet Rosh
Hashana 3:5, based on the pasuk in Yirmiyahu
34:13, explains this command as referring to
the obligation to free one's slaves.
(Apparently, as Rav Menachem Kasher notes in
Torah Shleima - milu'im to Parshat Va'era, 3,
there were noblemen among Bnei Yisrael who,
not only were excused from slave labor, they
themselves owned servants.)  As the Torah
explicitly writes in Vayikra 25:42, the laws
concerning the freeing of slaves relate to
the notion that Bnei Yisrael are ultimately
subservient to Hashem alone.  Before
realizing their freedom from bondage, Bnei
Yisrael must internalize this critical
lesson, that they are freed from slavery in
order to become the servants of Hashem.

      Three other general approaches to this
pasuk appear in the mefarshim:

      The Sifrei in Parshat Beha'alotcha
(91), quoted by Rashi here, understands the
command to Moshe and Aharon as urging them to
exercise patience when dealing with Bnei
Yisrael and speak respectfully when they
address Pharaoh.  Though Rashi views this
explanation as drash, as the pasuk makes no
mention of patience and respect, this
approach does accommodate the context of this
pasuk.  Moshe had just expressed his
frustration over Bnei Yisrael's refusal to
listen and the likely prospect of a similar
reaction on Pharaoh's part.  Hashem thus
urges him and Aharon to retain their
composure despite the intransigence of both
the people and Pharaoh.  This explanation
appears in the Zohar Ha-chadash (2:26) as
well as in the Rambam's Mishneh Torah
(Hilchot Sanhedrin 25:2), and in a slightly
different form in the Pesikta De-rav Kahana
(14).  In a similar vein, the Ibn Ezra quotes
a Karaite exegete, Yeshua, who explains this
pasuk as a charge to Moshe and Aharon not to
become angry as a result of their growing
frustration.  Whereas in his peirush
ha-katzar the Ibn Ezra mentions this
possibility without any further comment, in
his peirush ha-aroch he writes that 'there is
no need' for this interpretation.  (This
approach brings to mind an interesting
comment by the Ralbag on the immediately
preceding pasuk.  He claims that the 'kotzer
ruach' which led Bnei Yisrael not to listen
to Moshe refers to Moshe's - rather than Bnei
Yisrael's - frustration.  His growing
impatience led him to speak irritably, and
his words thus met upon deaf ears.  If so, it
would then stand to reason that Hashem must
urge Moshe to exercise more patience.)   

      The Akeidat Yitzchak interprets
'va-yetzavem' here as referring to the
conferral of a given status, rather than the
issuance of a command.  Citing examples from
Tehillim 33:9 and Melachim I 17:4, the
Akeidat Yitzchak explains that Hashem granted
Moshe and Aharon prominence and respect among
both Bnei Yisrael and Pharaoh's court, such
that their words would be heard.  Other
mefarshim adopting this approach include the
Abarbanel (as his first suggestion), the Or
Hachayim (though he adds as well the third
approach that we will soon see) and the Tzror
Hamor.

      Several mefarshim see this pasuk's
mention of Aharon as the key to its meaning.
Moshe had just expressed his discouragement,
compounded by his poor verbal skills(see
6:12), and so Hashem calls upon Aharon and
commands both brothers to return to Bnei
Yisrael and to speak to Pharaoh.  This was
Hashem's answer to Moshe's complaint - that
he take Aharon with him and address the
nation (for a second time) and then the king.
The Ibn Ezra (peirush ha-aroch), Chizkuni,
Rabenu Yosef Bechor Shor and Abarbanel (as
his second approach) explain along these
lines.  The Jerusalem Publication Society
Bible also seemed to have this approach in
mind when it translated this pasuk.

 

Inviting Eliyah Hanavi to the Seder

      We suggest in the shiur that Eliyahu's
'participation' in our seder reminds us that
before the final redemption we must perform
teshuva, and for this reason Eliyahu will
come before the unfolding of the redemption.
Just as Hashem called upon Bnei Yisrael to
repent before leaving Egypt, so must we
correct our ways in anticipation of the final
redemption.

      The Rema - Orach Chayim 480 - mentions
the custom of opening the door at the seder
and cites the explanation of the Mahari Brona
that this demonstrates our belief in Pesach
night as a 'leil shimurim' - a night of
watching, when Hashem grants us special
protection.  The Maharal, in his Haggada
"Divrei Negidim" rejects this explanation and
claims that we open the door to publicize our
belief in the coming of Eliyahu Hanavi prior
to the final redemption.  (See also Aruch
Hashulchan.)  He does not, however, relate
this to the concept of teshuva, as we suggest
in the shiur.  

      Though our explanation does not appear
explicitly in earlier sources, it may relate
to the approach taken by the Netziv to
explain the fifth cup poured at the seder.
As we know, the four cups drunk at the seder
correspond to the four expressions describing
Yetzi'at Mitzrayim in the beginning of
Parshat Vaeyra ('ve-hotzeiti', 've-hitzalti',
've-ga'alti', 've-lakachti').  The Netziv, in
his "Ha-amek Davar" commentary to 6:7,
suggests that the fifth cup - which we pour
but do not drink - commemorates the promise,
"and you shall know that I am Hashem your God
who takes you out from Egypt".  According to
the Netziv, this promise speaks of a level of
comprehension unattainable by the masses; it
refers to the unique knowledge and insight
acquired by the nation's spiritual elite.
Therefore, given the exclusive nature of this
'knowledge', we do not drink this fifth cup.

      In contemporary times, Rabbi Eliezer
Ginsburg, in his "Shirat Yehuda" commentary
on the Haggada, associates the Netziv's
explanation with the common reference to this
fifth cup as 'kos shel Eliyahu' (see, for
example, Mishna Berura 480:10).  Eliyahu will
come before the final redemption to teach,
guide and inspire, such that we may all
attain this lofty level of "you shall know
that I am Hashem your God", and we thus
appropriately name this fifth cup after
Eliyahu Hanavi.  This closely relates to our
suggestion, that the inclusion of Eliyahu at
the seder reminds us of the spiritual growth
required before the final redemption.

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20120119/c7702f0c/attachment-0003.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vaeyra1.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 62289 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20120119/c7702f0c/attachment-0003.pdf