[Par-reg.w] For Parshat Va'eyra - part one
Menachem Leibtag
mleibtag at gmail.com
Thu Jan 3 15:10:36 EST 2019
************************************************
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-reg.w/attachments/20190103/c5a66de3/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- 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-reg.w/attachments/20190103/c5a66de3/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: vaeyra1.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 87040 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg.w/attachments/20190103/c5a66de3/attachment-0001.doc>
More information about the Par-reg.w
mailing list