EXODUS [SEFER SHMOS]Below. Or back to:   [1]

Note:  MR = Moses [Moshe Rabbenu]   

…………………………

PARSHAT SHMOS

God tells MR [3:21] that the Jews would leave with the Egyptians regarding them favorably (‘chayn’). This was important because of the extraordinarily negative attitude of the Egyptians to the Jews (a somewhat familiar attitude even today?) - they were disgusted by the Jews [1:12], couldn’t eat bread with them [Gen 43:32], and despised them in their role as shepherds [Gen 46:34].

Self-Hatred and Galut

MR tries to separate two fighting Jews [2:14]: From the response of the violent man, we can see that he did not approve of MR’s killing of the Egyptian who had beaten the Jew the previous day.

We are told that before killing the Egyptian [2:12] “MR saw there was no-one around.” So who could have spread the rumor of the act if no-one was around during the slaying?

Obviously the Egyptian’s victim was there. So perhaps even the victim who was saved by MR may have presented MR’s actions in a negative light. Perhaps the one hitting the other Jew was the previous day’s victim!

This would certainly have disheartened MR and later on led him to believe that the people would not accept his leadership.

PC Names

MR names his son “Gershom” [2:22]. Besides the reason given for the name (see below), there are two hints at other possible reasons for the choice.

• MR met his wife and her sisters at the well: he saved them when the shepherds had chased them away; ‘and they chased’ = “vayigorshoom’ [2:17]. MR’s action certainly deserved to be commemorated, and it would not have been surprising if MR’s son was named for this act. However naming his son this way might have served as a constant reminder of the event and so could have antagonized the neighbors and even have been dangerous to his son in that area, and so it was not mentioned openly.

• Also, the very last passage of this week’s portion again contains the very same word: [6:1] God tells MR that Pharaoh would be mightily struck and would as a result eventually “chase the Jews out” of Egypt [“Yigorshem”]. Again it may be that the name was not given this meaning openly since it was an act that would occur only in the future, and had a connotation which could also perhaps serve as a source of antagonism.

• The meaning given for the name is that MR was “a stranger (“Ger”) in a strange land”. The other two sources seem much closer to the actual name: simply from the sound of the word, the source of “Gershom” seems more likely to be “vayigorshoom’ and/or “Yigorshem” than simply “Ger” . This lends support to the possibilities mentioned above.

• Perhaps the reason MR and his son were too vulnerable to openly mention the two reasons above as the source of the name might have been the fact that MR was a stranger in that land: this then would be the double entendre of the name, and of the alleged reason for it (being a stranger, “Ger”). (This is similar to the double meanings hidden in the naming of Be’er Sheva/Shova.)

Keeping a Low Profile

Yitro’s daughters tell him [2:19] “An Egyptian man saved us”. Although MR is criticized by the sages for allowing them to represent him this way, since he was a fugitive from the royal court it was probably wise not to immediately reveal his actual identity.

Testing MR’s Observance

MR sees the burning bush, and says [3:3-4]: “Let me see this wondrous sight”.

The Torah then says “And God saw that he turned to see”.

The implications are:

• It was not a foregone conclusion that he would turn to analyze it
• The fact that he did turn was important to God;

• Perhaps most people would not even notice the phenomenon, or not realize its wondrous aspect, or simply be ‘too busy’. God knew that MR was a very unique combination: on the one hand he was very humble, yet on the other hand he was an activist, willing to place his life on the line to save a fellow Jew, and was also willing to kill to save Jews. Now God wanted to test other aspects of his nature.

MR passed this initial test.

May God’s Spirit rest on Bush

Moses says “Let me please turn aside and see this wondrous sight, why the bush doesn’t get consumed”. Who is he talking to? Why does he need ‘permission’?

Perhaps he was studying Torah, or equivalently, in communication with God. 

• Abraham left conversation with God to welcome guests: he knew that this is what constitutes the true welcoming of the spirit of God.
• The Sages teach that one who is studying Torah may not interrupt to remark about a beautiful aspect of nature . The example given there is: a peson who interrupts his learning Torah to say “Oh, what a beautiful tree!” (‘ma na’eh ilan zeh’) . There are many commentaries on this: some say that what is forbidden is to consider this an ‘interruption” of Torah learning, since it implies that the Torah and the tree are not from the same ‘author’, God.
• MR does the equivalent of what Abraham did: rather than interrupting a contact with God to look at the wondrous phenomenon, he  perhaps suspects that God’s spirit was present in the bush, and so turned to it in the understanding that something which exemplified divine contact demanded his attention.

Hints:

• “asurah’ = forbidden:
• asurah na = “naeh asur”.

Moses’ Horns (Michaelangelo’s statue)

• After looking at the burning bush, MR hid his face in fear of looking at God [3:6].
• After his later encounters with God MR’s face shone and people hid their faces from fear[2].

Cause and Effect

In the context of the Torah’s accounts, a dream interpretation affects its realization; similarly the response to a divine mission affects its outcome.

• The implication of God’s initial command to MR [3:8-10] is that Pharaoh will listen to his request to free the Jews.
• It’s possible, however, that MR’s negative replies altered this intended future.
• MR’s first response to this command, “Who am I to do this?” could have derived from his humility, and God replies in kind[3], however analysis of the text (of God’s responses to MR) indicates that with each successive remark by MR in this cosmic dialogue, the fated negativity associated with the mission increases.

Serpents, Lepers, and Blood: The Signs as Warnings/Punishments/Portents

Although MR was the most worthy of his generation, and all subsequent generations, nevertheless as a human being he did have faults. Had MR immediately acquiesced in his mission and gone to confront Pharaoh, perhaps the entire mission would have gone successfully from the onset. As a result of his inadequate replies he was punished: the three signs served as punishments/warnings and also as portents of future calamities which would befall him if he did not change:

• The first sign is the staff turning into a snake, and then back again. This symbolized the counsel of the snake of Eden to disregard God’s commandment: MR disregarding God’s command to go and so the first sign was a warning to him.
• It served also as an augury of the future, in the matter of his son’s brit (see my article).

• The next sign involved MR’s hand turning white like a ‘metzora’; tzara’at was punishment for slander, MR slandered the elders and the people saying ‘they won’t believe me’.
• This sign too was also an augury of a future calamity which he might perhaps have acted to prevent: his actions led to Miriam slandering him, and she was punished with this same disease.

• The third sign was that of the Nile waters turning to blood. By causing the convincing of the Jews to be due to a display of miracles rather than due to their faith, MR caused a ‘chilul hashem’, for which the punishment is death, and hence the first sign was the turning to blood of the waters (MR had been saved by the Nile, and so this was especially significant.) However, since it was only later that this chillul hashem would come about, it was only then that he deserved punishment, and so as opposed to the other two signs, this one was not performed until later, at the Nile, in front of the People.
• As augury of future: the Nile was the river which had saved him. The water turning to blood symbolized his eventual death due to the fiasco over the drinking-water-from the stone in the desert.

How Good it is when Brothers Trust Each Other!

• God tells MR that Ahron will have joy in his heart when seeing Moshe [4:14], with the implication that he will not only accept MR’s being appointed despite his being the younger brother, but he will actually be happy about it.
• MR is being given further indication of God’s power: the ability to know what’s in another’s inner heart.
• Prediction of the future is an important power, however even though  God tells MR that Pharaoh will refuse to let the Jews go, this is not such an impressive prediction! More significantly he is told that Pharaoh ‘will harden his heart’. Again, this implies that God knows how Pharaoh will react in his inner heart.
• God tells MR that he, MR, will be to Ahron as a “God” [4:15], or at least as an ‘elohim’, a word used in the Torah for God , false Gods, and powerful leaders. Possibly this means that he need not fear that Ahron will disbelieve him about some aspect of his mission.

Take a Hike, Kike!

In their initial recorded encounter (at the burning bush) God tells MR [3:8] that the Jews will be brought from Egypt to Israel.

Immediately after repeating this [3:17], God tells MR [3:18] to relay this message to the elders and then go with them to Pharaoh and ask permission to go. However God does not tell MR to ask Pharaoh for permission to leave and go to Israel, but rather to ask only for a three-day hike to a spot in the desert where they can worship God!

Why would God ask only for such a minimal request? Why not ask for Pharaoh to free the people entirely?

• Perhaps this was meant to set the bar so low that Pharaoh by all rights should not have refused. That he would not even allow the Jews to go temporarily indicated that he was entirely unjustified, and it was then morally justifiable to punish him severely.
• Furthermore, in this way the refusal of Pharaoh was a challenge to God, and a religious affront rather than a political or national matter. Thus, rather than acting as proxy for the Jews and the suffering caused them by Pharaoh, God could ‘personally’ justify severe action against Pharaoh.
• The retribution against Pharaoh and Egypt could be made independent of the level of the Jewish people: the plagues could be sent and the Jews delivered from Egypt as a punishment of Pharaoh and Egypt without scrutinizing whether the Jews were deserving of all this on their own merit.

Did Jew Know That?

• The people believe Ahron and MR’s message of deliverance [4:30-31]: presumably they were notified that they would be going to the Land of Israel.
• However it’s not clear from the passage whether MR told the people that he was going to ask Pharaoh only for a religious holiday break from slavery, and thus it’s not clear whether the people suspected that when Pharaoh discovered that they were not returning that he would chase after them.

• When Pharaoh did eventually chase them they were indeed very fearful and wished that they hadn’t left Egypt at all – which would seem to indicate that they did not realize that the permission to leave had been only for a temporary break.

• After the flight of the Jews from Egypt, when the reports indicated that the Jews did not seem to be planning to return, or that they were lost, the Egyptians chased after the Jews (and ended up drowning in the Re(e)d Sea). This indicates that they probably believed the Jews were intending to go away only for a few days and only belatedly realized that they were intending to escape.

• On the one hand the fact that they were indeed able to catch up to the Jews probably indicates that their military might was such that they did not fear that the Jews could successfully escape. On the other hand however it would be somewhat naive to believe that the power which had arranged the great plagues would allow them to recapture the Jews.

Go Know: Pharaoh and Yitro

• MR makes a disingenuous request to Pharaoh to leave seemingly temporarily;

This is ironically mirrored when, on his way to delivering this very message:

• MR makes a misleading request to his father in law Yitro [4:18] to leave seemingly temporarily.

Tip of the Iceberg

After investing him with his life’s mission, God tries to kill MR?!! [4:21-26].

Or to kill his son?! (and which son? [4:25])

This is one of the more enigmatic accounts in the Torah.

Furthermore, there is clearly a deliberate linking of the warning to Pharaoh as delivered by MR and the subsequent actions by God regarding MR himself.

1. Three “firstborn”s are mentioned  – the People of Israel, Pharaoh’s son, and MR’s son.

2. Who is being addressed in [4:23]: Pharaoh or Moses? 

3. There is a strong parallel to another very enigmatic, highly symbolic and cosmically significant event: the ‘wrestling’ of Yakov and the ‘man’ [32:25-33].

• The similarity of the highly mysterious “Vataga LeRaglav [4:25]  and “Vayiga beKaf Yerecho”[32:26];
• The name Yisrael;
• A son being sent (The Jewish People/Yischak sends his son Yakov [after the blessings])
• The issue of firstborns.
• The intent to kill a firstborn/the one who usurped the prerogatives of the firstborn;
• A divine encounter ‘on the way’, at night;
• A struggle, but with a successful outcome;
• Surgery/a bodily injury (and both in the region of the inner thigh).
• The two earliest commandments (brit mila and not to eat the ‘gid ha’nasheh’)

Ahron’s Role

God tells Ahron to go meet MR [4:27]. Though it seems mundane, there is great significance to this divine message:

• The very fact of Ahron’s divine encounter will incline him to believe that MR had one as well;
• The specific content of God’s message – even if it was only to go meet his brother - validates MR’s mission: Ahron could certainly not doubt its authenticity when MR would tell him of it.
• MR’s motivation to fulfill his mission as commanded would be greatly strengthened when he would see that his older brother was indeed happy to have MR be the appointed Jewish leader.
• MR’s belief in the authenticity of the source of the command would be increased if a supporting message was independently received by someone else, far away.

Arafat, Saddam and Pharaoh

MR and Ahron tell Pharaoh that the God of Israel said “Let my People Go, and they will celebrate/worship in the desert” [5:1-3].

Strangely enough. even at the end of the story, MR never asks for the full freedom of the Jewish People, only for permission to go for a few days!

Why did God even bother to ask Pharaoh to release the Jews? Why not simply take them out of Egypt in a miraculous manner - as in any case occurred?

• Like Arafat up until last Pesach (!), and Saddam Hussein now, for a long time Pharaoh saw that he was able to renege on all his deals with impunity; each time, MR and the alleged “God” were ‘fooled’ into canceling the latest plague. But all this was a set-up so that the plagues could accomplish what they needed to, in the way that the prevarications of Arafat and Saddam Hussein engineered great blows against their power, and will IYH lead to their eventual downfall.

God intended that Pharaoh believe that he could manipulate God, promise to let them leave, and then renege, over and over again.

• To Pharaoh the fact that a God needs to ask him for permission to free his people to allow them to worship him implies that the God is recognizing that he is less powerful than Pharaoh!

• The overwhelming ‘military’ superiority of God as demonstrated in the plagues is considered irrelevant since Pharaoh believes that through his wiles he can prevent it from being fully exercised against him.

Hardening of the Arteries

We are told that God ‘hardened Pharaoh’s heart’. This however does not mean that Pharaoh’s freedom of will was impaired, as explained below.

• By creating the conditions for Pharaoh to conclude that he was ultimately in control, God was allowing Pharaoh to delude himself - this is the meaning of “God hardened Pharaoh’s heart”.

• God initially tells MR that he will kill the firstborns of the Egyptians [4:22]: this may have been part of the initial message delivered to Pharaoh. If so it’s possible that when this did not immediately materialize (it turned out to be the LAST plague), Pharaoh ‘hardened his heart’, that is, he decided it wouldn’t ever happen, taking this as a proof of the non-existence of God. So, by giving this message initially, God allows Pharaoh to fall into his own trap of disbelief; this then constitutes another means by which God ‘hardened Pharaoh’s heart’.

Oom Shmoom

MR tells Pharaoh [11:8 ] God’s message, including the fact that soon his servants will beg that the Jews leave, and that it will only be then that he will in fact go. And God tells MR to prepare the people for a hasty departure [12:11, 17].

This implies that the departure from Egypt:

• is imminent;
• is no longer contingent on Pharaoh’s ‘permission’.

The Jews indeed waited until Pharaoh and the Egyptians pressed them to leave, but it was not anymore a matter of permission.

The Jews left during the course of one or possibly two simultaneous debilitating plagues: death everywhere, and possibly with the darkness still not lifted. As a result the Egyptians could not prevent the departure of the Jews even if they had wished to. Thus, this departure was not a result made possible only by the permission of the Egyptians, but would have taken place even in its absence.

As the passage implies, basically the Egyptians merely hurried them along on their way.

………………………………………………………….

They Hate Us Because We’re Rich; and Because We’re Poor

• One the one hand Joseph the Jew saved Egypt from famine, and helped it maintain its pre-eminent place in world politics. On the other hand the Egyptians were disgusted by the Jews [1:12], couldn’t eat bread with them, and despised them in their role as shepherds. (A somewhat familiar attitude even today?)

• Before the Jews were actually enslaved, the Egyptians were afraid the Jews would leave. Why would the Egyptians not welcome the departure of a despised people? Probably because they realized the benefit accruing to Egypt of having these intelligent advisors of Josephs’s ilk. Just as was the case with various countries in recent times.

• In order to prevent the Jews from leaving when the opportunity arose, for example during a war.

the Egyptians conspired to enslave them: yet if they were expecting the Jews to want to leave and to be unable to leave except when Egypt was at war, then clearly the Jews must have already been in some form of bondage. And if so, then there was good reason for the Jews to want to leave. Rather than improving the lot of the Jews, their solution was to increase the level of bondage to complete servitude.

• As is the case with the Egyptians today, the ancient Egyptians probably believed many strange things about the Jews: as is the case today, it’s difficult to understand their motives in our terms. When they were wracked with terrible plagues and finally ‘consented’ to allow the Jews to leave, they actually seemed to imagine that the Jews would be returning to slavery!

Va’era and Bo:

Caveat Emptor: These are my own ideas (as far as I know); and so they are not based on sources

…………………………..

Parshat Va’era

And God Said to Moses: “I made you into a god”!  (7:1)

God tells Moses that he was being made into ‘elohim’ in relation to Pharaoh[4]; this term is often used in the Torah to speak of God, and so its use here can be shocking in reference to a person, especially in that it is being said by God! However actually this term ‘elohim’ is used in other contexts as well.

It is most shockingly employed in the passage describing the actions of the “sons of the ‘elohim’” [Genesis 6:2]. Prohibitions against idolatry refer to “other ‘elohim’” meaning “other gods”.

The context and meaning of the word ‘elohim’ in our passage (7:1) thereby clarifies that the word as used in Gen 6:2 need have no theological connotations, and the phrase ‘other gods’ in the Torah does not imply that there really are other gods.

Not only in the places mentioned above are there surprising overlaps in the usage of terminology between different levels of beings. The linguistic difference between references to God, humans, animals and inorganic matter is actually often blurred in the Bible, and in a surprising manner. 

·        The second creation account (the Garden of Eden account) refers to man and the animals by the same term - 'nefesh khaya' (living spirit);

·        Adam was seemingly originally directed to search among the animals for a 'helpmeet', before the creation of Eve;

·        The Flood account (in Genesis) refers to the pairs of animals as "man and wife" in the same way as it refers to human couples. [Compare Gen 7:2,3,7,16, 18; and 19 re animal ‘families’]

·        The placement of the curtains ('yeriot') in the Mishkan (Tabernacle) next to each other was referred to as “woman facing her sister” “isha el achosa” (Exodus 26:3). This wording is used elsewhere to refer to an actual woman and her sister: (Vayikra (Leviticus) 18:18 ) “Do not have relations with a woman and (in addition to) her sister” “isha el achosa”. In fact the word translated as ‘facing’, is ‘el’ in the first passage, and ‘el’ is used in the other passage to mean ‘with’, and so the Torah uses the exact same language in both passages, once for ‘a woman in addition to her sister’ the other time for ‘a curtain facing a curtain’.

Nepotistic Theology

God tells Moses “I will make you a god to Pharaoh, and Ahron will be your prophet”! In what sense is Moses to be a god and Ahron his prophet?

Immediately afterwards God tells Moses that when he and Ahron are in front of Pharaoh he should tell Ahron to cast his staff and it will turn into a serpent: in this way he seems to Pharaoh like a god, with his brother Ahron as his prophet.

A Leader Whose Staff was full of Snakes

God tells Moses that the staff will turn into a ‘tanin’ [7:9], usually translated as ‘serpent’. However the word appears also in the creation account, and in a very interesting context.

In the creation account the word ‘create’ is used only three times, in three different contexts: when recounting the creation of:

• Heaven and Earth
• humans
• the ‘taninim hagdolim’, the large taninim.

All other entities are said to have been ‘formed’ or made’.

The reason for the first two uses of ‘create’ is apparent:

• Heaven and Earth were created ex-nihilo (from ‘nothing’), and the rest of creation, except for humans, was made or formed from that;
• Humans have free will and are created in the divine image, in distinction from all the rest of God’s creation, and originated in a special act of creation;

It is natural to suppose from this that the ‘taninim’ are special.

Let there be Taninn (so Let My People Go!)

• The original act of God as related in the creation account was “yehi (let there be) ohr (light)”; 
• The same word “yehi” is used by God in our passage: “yehi (let there be) tannin”.

Indeed, instead of God saying “take your staff and cast it in front of Pharaoh and it will be a tannin” the passage reads: “take your staff and cast it in front of Pharaoh let there be a tannin”.[5] And so the Torah reports God as using the same exact word in the same form (yehi) as for “let there be” in “let there be light”.

After God says “let there be light” the next words are “and there was light” “vayehi ohr”. In our context, in the next passage (7:10) we are told “and it became a tannin” “vayehi le-tanin” using the same word “vayehi” used in Genesis. So we have  a parallel:

• Yehi letanin = yehi ohr
• Vayehi letanin = vayehi ohr

This serves to strengthen our feeling that there is something special about the tannin!

Why The Tanin Was the First Sign

The serpent in Eden represents the insidious drive in Man to rebel against God; and as in Eden, even against God’s unambiguous and direct personal command.

• The episode of the snake in Eden and the Tree of Knowledge represent the emergence of human free will, and human rebellion against the will of God, even God’s express command.
• The episode recounted here deals with the only Biblical case openly involving God’s suspension of human free will: God’s hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, and his resulting rebellion against God’s express command.

Considering that God’s choice for a first sign to Pharaoh was a tannin, which involved special creation in Genesis, and for which the phrase ‘let there be’ is used here, and the direct connection between in both episodes to free will, perhaps  one can speculate that the ‘tanin’ might be the ‘snake’ of the Garden of Eden.

If so, we could understand why the word ‘create’ is used: it is unique in that like Man it had the power of reason and speech, and perhaps the ability to exert its will to disobey God.

At their first encounter, Pharaoh shows his contempt for God, Moses, and the Jewish people, and sets himself up for God’s intervention. God tells Moses that at the next encounter Pharaoh will ask for a sign, and indeed this is the case – this implies that this request of Pharaoh’s was divinely implanted.

Perhaps we can say that in order to effectuate the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart, or to symbolize it to Moses and other insiders, what was required was a tannin, which was – or represented  - the Edenic snake’; thus God made Pharaoh request a sign, and this requested sign opened the door to the tannin.

Why Pharaoh Had the Confidence to Confront God

After Ahron performed the snake miracle, Pharaoh had his magicians do the same. After seeing their success, Pharaoh hardened his heart.

Was he wrong to do so? After all, his magicians had the same power, and so it would seem that he legitimately did not recognize Moses and Ahron’s power as coming from God!

However the crucial point is that Ahron’s staff/snake swallowed their snakes: this was a clear symbol of his superior power, and should have convinced Pharaoh, yet despite this Pharaoh hardened his heart.

Perhaps we can nevertheless understand why Pharaoh was prepared to take the chance of opposing this power:  Pharaoh reasoned that:

• If God needed Pharaoh’s permission to get the Jews out, God could not be too powerful;

• Since the magicians could accomplish at least part of God’s miracle, it would seen that the power of God was not overly much beyond that of the Egyptian magicians, and therefore perhaps God’s power was not fatally dangerous to Pharaoh;

• Moses’s earliest message to Pharaoh was that God would kill his firstborns [4:22-23], but this had not occurred, and so Pharaoh assumed that God’s power was limited.

However all this is psychological justification rather than moral justification. On the moral plane of course he was unjustified in enslaving the Jews to begin with, and should have immediately released them when Moses came to present his message, even without signs, and even if he didn’t believe in Moses’s God.

Joseph Who?

After seeing the staff swallow the magicians’ snakes, and remaining as it was despite this, Pharaoh should have been reminded of the dream of Pharaoh of the cows swallowing the other cows, without their leaving a trace -  and then been convinced that this is indeed a sign from the same God who had saved Egypt long before, and that it had been these same Jews who had saved Egypt.

Of course the Egyptians had deliberately pushed all that out of their collective memory, they had all – as had the Minister long ago - conveniently “forgotten” Joseph. And this led eventually to their downfall.

The Plagues: Blow by Blow

1)      Blood: After the ‘tanin’ episode, God sent Moses again, this time to teach Pharaoh a lesson [7:17].

Pharaoh was not to be given an additional ultimatum before the first plague would be delivered: instead Moses was to go to Pharaoh, deliver a short speech castigating him, and then immediately turn the Nile into blood; and so he did.

The magicians then also turned the Nile water into blood. And Pharaoh hardened his heart (seemingly by himself, not as a result of God’s intervention in his choices), as God had warned Moses would happen.

This reaction of Pharaoh’s might be considered reasonable - after all, his magicians had the same power as this alleged “God”!

However the crucial point is that the magicians couldn’t return the Nile to water (as can be seen from the continuation of the story - the Egyptians couldn’t find drinking water), and so Pharaoh should have been more forthcoming, he could even have requested more signs, perhaps more unequivocal ones, but instead he simply refused their request[6].

2)      Frogs: The order of events for the next plague is ambiguous: [7:26 - 8:11]: God tells Moses to tell Pharaoh that if he doesn’t send out the Jews he’ll be hit with a plague of frogs. We’re not told about their delivery of this message. Instead we are told that God said to Moses “tell Ahron “pick up your staff… and bring the frogs”, but this does not seem to have been in the presence of Pharaoh.

Could it be that Moses and Ahron didn’t deliver the prior warning? Perhaps at the behest of God, canceling the order to give the warning?

We are told [8:3] that Pharoah’s magicians duplicate this miracle, presumably at his request, implying that he understood that this sudden plague of frogs was brought by Moses. This being the first plague, it was not necessarily obvious that Moses was the source, and therefore Pharaoh’s realization of this implies that indeed Moses and Ahron had carried out the warning.

As with the plague of blood, although the magicians could duplicate the bringing of frogs they couldn’t get rid of them. This time however [8:4] Pharaoh calls for Moses and asks that he pray to God to get rid of them, and he’ll send out the Jews to sacrifice to God.

It’s interesting that Pharaoh breaks at this point, but not earlier with the plague of blood.

Also, Pharaoh ask Moses to pray to God for help, rather than simply asking Moses to get rid of them. Does he believe in God? And that God sent the plagues? If so, it makes sense that he agrees to send out the Jews as requested, especially as the entire (temporary) departure is ostensibly only in order that the Jews offer sacrifices to this God. 

As per Pharaoh’s request, the peace plan, Moses cries out to God about the frogs, and God does as Moses requested.

This is quite strange! Did Moses really have to pray to God to get rid of the frogs?! What was God’s plan?! Would God have otherwise let Pharaoh stew in his juice? If Pharaoh agreed to let the Jews go after the plague was cancelled, why did God not immediately cancel it?

Two reasons suggest themselves:

• God wanted Pharaoh to treat Moses as the intermediary (Moses was to be as a ‘god’ to Pharaoh):
• God knew that Pharaoh would not actually agree to let them go.

However, why did Moses have to actually cry out to God to cancel the plague – God knew that Moses had agreed to this peace treaty and was now required to cancel the plague, so why not just tell Moses, OK I’ll cancel it?

It seems as though Moses was willing to believe Pharaoh but God knew it was futile and so it was up to Moses to convince God to cancel the plague. Moses prayed, and so God relented. And then so did Pharaoh.

3) Lice: This plague was visited on the Egyptians without any warning. The magicians tried without success to duplicate the feat and concluded that this was “the finger of God” [8:15]. And Pharaoh hardened his heart and didn’t listen to them.

Interesting points:

• there was no prior warning
• even though Moses did not perform the miracle in their presence the magicians understood what was happening and tried to imitate it;
• the magicians concluded that it was the finger of God!
• Pharaoh hardened his heart even though the magicians admitted that this was from God.

4) Wild Animals: God tells Moses to go to Pharaoh and warn him that wild animals will plague him if he doesn’t send out the Jews.

·        The wild animals come – God sends them rather than asking Moses to tell Ahron to summon them with his staff.

·        The magicians are not mentioned in this context.

·        Pharaoh agrees that he’ll let the Jews sacrifice to God, but he says that it will be in Egypt rather than allowing them to go out to the desert!

·        Moses then refers [8:22] to the fact that Egyptians would object since it was anathema to them (an interesting vignette on contemporary Egyptian beliefs) and so they must go to the desert.

·        Pharaoh agrees, but stipulates that they shouldn’t go far – probably implying that he was afraid they’d escape. He was still heartened by the fact that this God seemed to need his permission to get the Jews out, and also since he was able to fool the God into relenting before. Moses is less naïve, and warned Pharaoh that he shouldn’t play games anymore.

·        Then again we are told that Moses had to pray to God to cancel the plague! And that “God did as Moses requested” rather than simply going along with the agreed-upon plan.

·        The wild animals disappeared and with them Pharaoh’s willingness to send out the Jews.

5) Plague (hoof and mouth, not mad cow):

·        God sends Moses to warn Pharaoh that a biological warfare plague was to be sent which would wipe out all his livestock, but would not affect the animals of the Jews! And so it was.

·        The magicians are not mentioned in this context.

·        We are told that Pharaoh verified that although all his animals were dying, those of the Jews were not –  and the result of this was that he hardened his heart! He must have interpreted the mercy of God’s not killing his people as a sign of weakness, and figured that he could eventually prevail over a God who was not capable of the same ruthlessness that he himself was capable of.

6)      boils:  And so God again sends a plague to the Egyptians without warning, this time a bio plague affecting humans rather than just animals – but not the Jews. The plague begins with ash floating in the air [9:11] [!]:

• The magicians were also affected and so could not even attempt to replicate this feat.
• For the first time we are told that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart [9:12] – as God had earlier told Moses he would do – and so the plague has no emotional effect on Pharaoh.

Note the progressions:

The Magicians:

·        The staff into snake miracle was duplicated by the magicians but Ahron’s staff swallowed theirs.

·        The blood and frogs plagues were duplicated by the magicians but they couldn’t cancel them.

·        The lice miracle was beyond the magicians’ powers;

·        The wild animals and animal plague miracle was not even attempted by the magicians;

·        The boils plague affected the magicians themselves, and incapacitated them;

Pharaoh’s Reactions:

·        The staff into snake miracle and the water into blood plague didn’t affect Pharaoh.

·        The frog miracle made Pharaoh agree to send out the Jews, but only after the plague would be cancelled.

·        The magicians tried without success to duplicate the lice plague and concluded that this was “the finger of God” [8:15]. Pharaoh hardened his heart and didn’t listen to them.

·        After the wild animals come, Pharaoh agrees that he’ll let the Jews sacrifice to God, but he says that it will be in Egypt rather than allowing them to go out to the desert!

·        Boils: For the first time we are told that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart

Egyptians Learn the Fear of God

• God tells Moses to warn Pharaoh and his people that hail was on its way and they could save their animals and crops by bringing all indoors (and save themselves by staying inside as well).
• God speaks at length about the purpose of the plague – to make God’s power evident to all [9:16]. It is in order to be able to accomplish this that God had previously hardened Pharaoh’s heart so that he would not give up before this plague was sent.
• For the first time God has given a warning to the Egyptian people, meant to help those who believed to escape the wrath of God[7].

Why did God warn them now, giving them an opportunity to escape the effects of the plague for the first time?

Answer: Pharaoh’s refusal to send out the Jews after the previous plague was only due to the fact that God had previously hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and so for the first time the coming plague was not a deserved one – except to those who disregarded God’s warning. And indeed we are told that those Egyptians who feared God heeded the call and brought all indoors and did not suffer losses as the others did.

We can see that this is the beginning of the accomplishment of God’s earlier stated desire: to bring the Egyptians to the awareness of God.

Hail to the Chief: And to his Servants

7)      Hail mixed with fire: The hail is accompanied by tremendously loud thunder-sounds, and destroys all that is outdoors – all over Egypt except in the Jewish-settled Land of Goshen.

• Again the magicians are not involved.
• This time God did not intervene in Pharaoh’s heart, and Pharaoh now sings a new tune:
• “I sinned this time, God is righteous and I and my people are wicked. Pray to God and let God’s loud noises cease and I will send you out”.
• This time Moses says he will simply raise his palms to God (as soon as he is out of the city) and it will all stop. But Moses also tells Pharaoh that he knows that Pharaoh and his servants do not yet really fear God [9:30].
• Moses raises his hands to God, and all stops, and Pharaoh reneges again – without God’s intervention: but this time his servants harden their hearts as well.

We can imagine that with each successful ploy Pharaoh’s belief increases that he can play this to a successful conclusion. And now some of the servants join in, hardening their hearts as well, probably because they see that:

• Pharaoh can fool God over and over again, making and breaking treaties;
• God doesn’t act unilaterally to take the Jews out himself;
• God doesn’t seem to be able or willing to kill or expel Pharaoh or even punish him personally.

The Sound of One God Clapping

• Pharaoh was so frightened that he says: “Pray to God and let God’s loud noises cease and I will send you out” [9:28]: the fire mixed with hail did not frighten him as much as these sounds;

• Adam and Eve heard the sound of God and were afraid;
• The Jewish People ‘saw the sounds’ at Sinai, and when they heard God’s voice speaking the first two commandments they were so frightened they begged God to stop and Moses to intermediate instead.
• Sounds were used by God to chase away the enemies of the Jews before they came to do battle.

Parshat Bo

Locust in the Pots? Revolting

8)      Locust: Moses is now told that God has hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and the hearts of his servants, in order that God will be able to make more miracles. Why more miracles? In order that the Jews will be able to tell their children for posterity what had happened, and they will know “that I am God”.

• Moses comes to Pharaoh and tells him that a plague of locust will be coming, and they will devour whatever was left in the fields from the previous plagues. In ordinary circumstances perhaps Pharaoh would have relented at this point, but God had hardened his heart.
• Moses, gives the message, turns and leaves. Presumably he felt there was no need to stay, to say anything more or wait for Pharaoh’s response, since he knew that God had hardened Pharaoh’s heart.
• This time however, after Moses’ abrupt departure, the servants say “how long will this be a trap for us, let them go and serve (their) God: don’t you already know that Egypt is destroyed?” This is unprecedented: not bad enough that his kitchen is full of locust, but Pharaoh now finds his servants revolting!

God Helps Everyone Follow the Path they Choose

How is it that the servants revolt against Pharaoh after we are told that God hardened their hearts?

Perhaps what is meant by God hardening the hearts of Pharaoh, and of his servants is: giving strength to each to do as they really desire:

• Pharaoh wanted strength to resist God;
• Pharaoh’s servants needed strength in order to stand up to Pharaoh!       [8]

Pharaoh the Hypocrite: The Ax Murder who’s Kind to Children

Upon the revolt of Pharaoh’s servants, Moses and Ahron are returned to Pharaoh (not “And Pharaoh summoned them!”) who tells them “Go serve (your) God – who’s going?”

Moses answers: “everyone”, and Pharaoh, suddenly concerned for the safety on a desert journey of the small children (who he had earlier cast into the Nile) says only the adults should go [10:10-11]; he then throws Moses and Ahron out.

Moses: Not That Naïve

9)      Locust: God now tells Moses - rather than Ahron - to use his staff to bring the locusts.

The locusts come and cover everything, eating all that is edible.

• Pharaoh quickly summons Moses and Ahron and says: “I sinned to (your) God and to you. Please absolve my sin and pray to (your) God to remove this death [10:16].”
• Moses leaves and prays to God, who then removes all the locusts!

Why would Moses be so naïve again?! And why does God permit this transparent ploy by Pharaoh to Succeed?!

Probably because God had told Moses that this Pharaoh’s earlier refusal was the result of God’s hardening of his heart, and that the purpose was to be able to make large miracles which would serve as signs of God’s dominion for generations to come.

Realizing that Pharaoh is now a puppet in the hands of God Moses does not chastise Pharaoh this time, or warn him not to play games.

And indeed God then hardens Pharaoh’s heart [10:20], and Pharaoh does not send the Jews out.

10)  Darkness: God now tells Moses to bring Darkness.

Pharaoh summons Moses and says that even the children can go, but the sheep and cattle have to remain. Moses answers that (not only will they take their own livestock but) Pharaoh will himself give them animals to sacrifice!

God hardens Pharaoh’s heart and he doesn’t send them out.  And then Pharaoh adds “get out, and don’t dare come again “to see my face”, the next time you come, you die!”. And Moses says [10:29] “as you said, I will never see you again.” This is ironic, as it is taking place during the Darkness.

[God now tells Moses that there is only one plague left, and then not only does God make the Egyptians favorably disposed to the Jewish people but  “The man Moses was (had become) a great man in the eyes of Pharaoh’s servants and in the eyes of the people”[11:3] (but not in Pharaoh’s eyes).]

11)  The death of the firstborn: This last plague is sent directly by God rather than via Ahron or Moses. It is a fulfillment of the very first message to Pharaoh “I will kill your firstborn”, delivered long before [4:21-23]. Until this point Pharaoh had perhaps believed that the non-fulfillment of this ultimate disaster implied a weakness on the part of God, and perhaps this gave him strength to resist.

When it does in fact occur, Pharaoh crumbles totally [12:31-33] – he summons Moses and Ahron and tells them to go, with all the Jewish people, and all their animals, to worship God as they had said. No conditions: not only that everyone and everything could go, but they could go without Moses having to first stop the plague!

The Egyptians - saying “we’re all dying” - gathered around the Jews and hurried them out of Egypt: they leave, with the dough only partially ready, on their backs. This is the Exodus.

Moses: Great but Humble

The passage in our portion about Moses’ status in Egypt at this point contrasts in an interesting way another famous passage about him: the passages are clearly interlinked by their phraseology:

• “The man Moses was (had become) a great man in the eyes of Pharaoh’s servants and in the eyes of the people”[11:3].
•  “And the man Moses was the most humble (person who ever lived)”.

Causal Loops: Back to the Future

• It may seem that the reason we eat matzah on Passover is to commemorate the fact that we had to leave in a hurry, either that we had to escape, or the opposite, that the Egyptians were pushing us out.
• However, before the night of the Exodus [12:11] God tells Moses that the people should prepare a sacrifice, the Pascal lamb, and eat it in a hurry while dressed for travel and with their walking sticks in hand, ready to depart Egypt.
• Clearly it is not simply as a response to the urgent pleading of the Egyptians to get out that the Jews left in a hurry – this was planned by God from the start.

God tells Moses that the Pascal sacrifice is to be eaten on the eve of their departure, and is to be eaten with matza [12:8] – this would be several hours before they would leave with dough on their backs, not having had time  for it to rise due to the hasty departure!

Similarly, the command to observe a 7-day holiday every year upon arrival in the Land of Israel, during which matza would be eaten and no leaven should be found in the house, was given before the hasty departure and the issue of the matza hot having time to rise!

More Divine Heart Bypass Surgery

• God tells Moses that before the First-born plague the Jews should collect jewelry etc from the Egyptians, who will be positively disposed to them – rather than despising them, as was the case before. God had promised to Moses long before that when the Jews will leave Egypt they will ‘find favor in the eyes of the Egyptians’ and now God makes that happen.
• Furthermore, Moses was (had become) “a great man in the eyes of Pharaoh’s servants and in the eyes of the people”[11:3] (but not in Pharaoh’s eyes!).

Just as God had interfered with Pharaoh’s internal decision-making, so too God interfered to make the Egyptians like the Jews.

Creating the Circumstances which Allow for Desired Eventualities

God brought about the situation where the Egyptians liked the Jews enough to want to give them everything[9].

Why did God want this? And why would he want the Jews to take jewelry, gold and silver?

• Perhaps the jewelry was required for a later, higher, purpose: it served to later build the Tabernacle ( but also to build the ‘Golden Calf’, and so it was potent indeed).

• Furthermore: One of the greatest acts of the People after the exodus was their contribution of gold and silver for this construction – it was so copious that Moses had to tell them to stop bringing! Perhaps God, knowing that the potential existed for this, wanted to make this act possible should the Jewish People choose to act this way – and they did indeed do so.

This Jewelry Display is on Permanent Loan from the Egyptian Museum

Why did everyone pretend that everything was only being borrowed? And why did the Egyptians agree to ‘lend’ the Jews their valuables?

• Possibly they really believed the Jews would return to Egypt, and would then give it back; however to imagine that the Jews would return to Egypt – perhaps to slavery - would be impossibly naïve.
• Perhaps it was clear to all that they were not intending to return – the Jews must have been speaking all over about how Moses was going to fulfill the promise of God to bring them to the land of their ancestors etc, and it is reasonable to assume that this was known to the Egyptians. For whatever reason however God had told Moses to ask only for a desert excursion, and so in line with this agreed-upon pretense on all sides that they were going away temporarily the Jews didn’t ask to take the jewelry, but only to ‘borrow’ it.

Alternately:

• The Egyptians felt that the jewelry was partial compensation for hundreds of years of slavery and its concomitant unpaid labor;
• they wanted to contribute to the worship of God that the Jews were setting out to perform,;
• they were made to feel kindly disposed by God and weren’t rationally involved in the decision to give away their jewelry.

The Plagues affected:

1)      Blood: the Nile, source of water, and symbol of Egypt. Thirst for a week, no lasting damage.

2)      Frogs: Blurring the boundaries between the outside which is full of insects and the indoors which is supposed to be free of them. No lasting damage.

3)      Lice: Marring the comfort of the Egyptians. Some lasting effects.

4)      Wild Animals Marauding: blurring the difference between jungles and inhabited, civilized countries; many animals and perhaps people killed.

5)      Animal Disease: Killed animals, lasting economic damage.

6)      Boils: First actual disease to afflict the Egyptians themselves (a large step beyond lice).

7)      Hail: Physically destroyed the crops so that they couldn’t grow;

8)      Locusts: ate the destroyed crops so that the Egyptians couldn’t use it;

9)      Darkness: no light, no possibility of movement; Fear.

10)  Firstborns: Brought death to every Egyptian household.

God Punishes According to the Transgression : Mida Kneged Mida:

Reasons for the choice of plague: they were punishments for Egyptian transgressions:

1)      Throwing the children into the Nile à The Nile water turned to blood;

2)      The Jews multiplied, and the Egyptians in their antiJewish hatred couldn’t stand it: they considered that “the land was full of them” [1:7] “Vatimaleh ha’aretz otam”: à in punishment their land became full of frogs: According to the midrash the Egyptians hit the frog that God brought into Egypt and it split each time it was hit until it filled the land: so to it says about the Jews when they were enslaved: the more they were punished the more they multiplied [1:12];

3)      The Egyptians viewed the Jews as insects [1:7,12], “Vayishritzu” à so they were afflicted by lice;

4)      Pharaoh ordered the Jewish midwives to kill the male children, and they refused, using the excuse that the Jewish women gave birth on their own, like wild animals ‘Chayos Hena’ [1:19]: as punishment for forcing the Jewish women to give birth in secret or alone like wild animals the Egyptians were plagued by wild animals;

5)      God warns the Jews after leaving Egypt not to be like the Egyptians: not to engage in bestiality[10] à their animals were afflicted by a plague;

6)      The magicians attempted to show Pharaoh that he need not listen to God’s command since they could duplicate the miracles and plagues. In fact they attempted duplication on their own initiative (see passages quoted above) à  a plague of boils was sent to afflict everyone, and it was so intense that the magicians themselves succumbed [9:11];

7)      The Egyptians ‘forgot’ Joseph who had saved their entire agriculture, all their crops, and so the hail was sent to destroy it all à Hail was sent to destroy the crops;

8)      The Jews were considered disgusting to the Egyptians, like insects[11] à The locust was sent to crawl into every open space including their pots.

9)      The Egyptians were considered abominators, due to bestiality (see above) and homosexuality à they were punished with the Darkness (In this connection see 10:23, Hebrew)

10)  God’s first message to Pharaoh was that since he did not free God’s first born son – the Jewish People – his own would die à the plague of the firstborn.

NOT COMPLETED: For each plague:

·         Warnings to Pharaoh

• Motive of God in bringing the plague (to show all that “I am God” etc)
• Reaction of: Pharaoh: Egyptians: (Jews). Response of Moses to Pharaoh
• How the plague was brought: How it was stopped, if at all
• Who executed the plague: Ahron: Moses: God.

…………………………………………………………………….

פרשת בשלח: הפטרה

לא בהכרח שיעל התכוונה מיד להרוג את סיסרא. בוודאי היתה היא צריכה לחשוב מה לעשות אחרי שפתאום הופיע סיסרא על יד אוהלה. גם הפסוקים לא מרמזים בכלל על כוונתה של יעל להרוג את סיסרא. אל אף שמעשיה חרגו מבקשת סיסרא ­ שנתנה חלב כשנתבקשה למים ומכסה את הנרדף בסמיכה שיתחמם ­ אין לראות בזה כוונה להרוג אותו שהרי אז סיסרא היה מבין זאת. אפשר לראותם כמעשי מארחת לאורח ­ כמו שסיסרא עצמו ראה את זה. רק לאחר שסיסרא אמר לה לעמוד לפני האוהל פתאום נאמר לנו שהיא נגשה אליו והרגתו. נוכל לפרש את זה כאילו שלא התכוונה להרגו ­ אפילו אם רצתה לעשות זאת אלא שמשהוא במצב השתנה והביא אותה להורגו.

מה השתנה

יעל היתה יראת שמים וידעה שסיסרא היה חייב מיתה. אבל סיסרא היה גם ידיד של בעלה וגם אורח באהלה ואז גם היהמגיע לו שהיא תבוא לעזרתו לפי חוקי הנימוס החאבים של התרבות ההוא. אבל סיסרא במילותיו ליעל שיחרר אותה מחיובה ואז איפשר לה לבצע את שידעה שבאמת מגיע לו.

איך

סיסרא אומר לה לעמוד בפתח האוהל כדי להסתיר אותו וגם לענות "לא" אם היא תישאל לגבי נוכחותו. בכך סיסרא עירב אותה בסכנה שאם היא לא רק מארחת אותו כדין אלה עוזרת לו לברוח אם הוא יתגלה תחשב היא כאויב וגם אולי חייבת מיתה. בחריגתו כך מזכותו כאורח שיחרר אותה מחובתה להעניק לו המקלט של הכנסת אורחים.

בנוסף לכך סיסרא אמר לה לשקר ולהגיד שהוא לא נמצא. אם כך מותר לה לשקר גם להפוך את ההזמנה האמיתית של קודם לשקר ע"י הריגתו או לאמת את דבריו שהוא "לא נמצא" ע"י כך שהיא הורגת אותו.

.................................................

הפטרת וירא: מלכים ב:ד:יג­לז

ברכה מה' קורה לכאורה שלא כנגד חוקי הטבע.

ברכה יכול לחול על התבואה בגורן כל עוד שלא נמדדה. אחרי שנמדד אין זה יכול להשתנות.

קביעת עובדה מונעת מברכה לשנות את המצב.

אע""פ שהפסוק מספרת לנו שהילד מת אין אלו שומעים את הקביעה הזאת מפי אמו ולא מפי הנביא או נערו.

ד:יט: "אל אמו וישב אל ברכיה עד הצהרים וימת. ותעל ותשכיבהו על מטת איש האלקים ותסגר בעדו...ותצא". "ויאמר מדוע... ותאמר שלום". "השלום לילד ותאמר שלום". היא מונעת מאנשים להכנס אל הילד לאבא היא לא אמרת שהילד אפילו מאוד חולה ולנביא אומרת רק "השאלתי בן מאת אדני..." והנביא מיד אומר לגחזי "חגר מתניך...כי תמצא איש לא תברכנו וכי יברכך איש לא תעננו ושמת משענתי על פני הנער". מיד הבין הנבא מה המצב. אבל איננו קובע זאת באמירה. גחזי חוזר ואומר להם "לא הקיץ הנער" ולא "הנער עדיין מת". הפסוק אבל אומר לנו י­ויבא אלישע הביתה והנההנער מת" הווה אומר שאלישע ידע שהנער מת. אבל הוא לא קבע את העובדה התפלל והחיה אותו. והאמא לא אמרת כלום אפילו לא לבעלה וכך לא היה הוכחה שהיתה אולי תחית המתים כנגד הטבע. או בצורה שהיתה מחוץ לידיעה הרפואית דאז.

גם אברהם אומר למשרתיו "שבו לכם פה עם החמור ואני והנער נלכה עד כה ונשתחווה ונשובה אליכם". ז"א הוא לא קובע שיצחק ימות ולא אומר ישירות שאלקים רצה שהוא יועלה כעולה. הקביעה של אדם ובמיוחד של בית דין יש לה השפעה על הטבע ועל האפשרות שיקרה נס.

ד:ג­ז: "לכי שאלי לך כלים מן החוץ מאת כל שכניך כלים רקים אל תמעיטו עי...ותלך מאתו ותסגר הדלת". כנראה בלי לשאול כלים מהשכנים. וכשנגמר הכלים "ויהי כמלאת הכלים...אין עוד כלי ויעמד השמן". הברכה היתה לפי האמונה של המשפחה ­ אם היו מאמינים לנביא והיו מביאים עוד כלים היו מקבלים יותר.

השפע יכול לזרום רק כשישנם כלים לקבלו. ואז הוא זורם לפי יכולת הקבילה של האדם וזה נקבע לפי מידת האמונה של המקבל.

גם האשה וגם אברהם לא האמינו לברכה שקבלו: אברהם ושרה צחקו והאשה השונמית אמרה "אל תכזב בשפחתך". כתוצאה שניהם הועמדו במצב שחשבו שהילד המובטח מת.

פעמיים כתוב "ויסגור בעדו" כמו אצל תבת נח.

האשה אמרה שוב ביטוי שמראה חוסר אמונה: "השאלתי בן.." האם היו השלכות לזה

……………….

The Word Elohim

1)      22:27: The word “elohim” here has a double meaning, human and God.

{Introductory: “Don’t curse elohim; don’t curse your leaders.” The word “elohim” can mean not only God but also  “judge” or ‘great person’ [as eg in Genesis: “sons of elohim”] so Tradition teaches that the passage reads: “Don’t curse God or judges; don’t curse your leaders. }

2) In a highly unusual usage, rather than using “elohim acherim” “other gods” [meaning of course “false gods”] in 22:19 the word “elohim” itself is used to connote false gods!”

3) 24:10  In a highly unusual statement, we are told that the Jewish People saw ‘elokei Yisrael’ “the God(?)of Israel”

B) [22:7] God’s humility leads the Torah to not only place cursing God and humans in the same category, but even to use a word (Elokim) which is ambiguous to mean both God and human judges.

In this case the humility is particularly apt: since it would be arrogant for a human leader to command others to not curse him, God uses especially humble language to communicate to us not to curse God.

C) “And they saw the God of Israel”!! [24:10]

What can this mean?! Perhaps:

·        Just as what they experienced at the giving of the 10 commandments could best be described as “they ‘saw’ the sounds of the shofar”, here too they experienced something beyond the physical, and it could best be described in human terms as “they saw the God of Israel”. (The word ‘saw’ used in the Torah is the same in both cases).

·        We are told in the Torah: “what God wants from us is that we be in awe”

: "מה ה אלקיך שאל מעמך כי אם ליראה את ה' אלקיך" (דברים י יב) ואכן "ויראו את אלקי ישראל".

The word for ‘awe’ has the same spelling as ‘see’. Perhaps this passage therefore means: “they were in awe of the God of Israel”.

Social Justice

A)  “Don’t oppress gerim, because you were gerim in Egypt” [22:20]:

·        This was especially ironic at the time the command was given, since who could then have been the gerim to be oppressed other than Egyptians who had come along (eruv rav etc)!?

·        Perhaps one can read the passage a bit differently: Don’t think that since when YOU were gerim YOU were oppressed that this means that when YOU are the majority you should oppress whoever is the ger among YOU! [“Don’t (think that you are justified to) oppress gerim because you (once were oppressed when you) were gerim in Egypt”]

·        Combining the two above: the command becomes “don’t oppress those new gerim among you who were previously your oppressors”.

B)   Sensitizing via Past and Future Suffering [20:20-23]

·        Past suffering should make one more sensitive: “Don’t oppress gerim, because you WERE that yourself.”

·        The threat of future suffering as retribution can deter from injustice: “Don’t oppress the widow and orphan or you WILL BE that yourselves.”

C)  God’s Complaint Policy

22:26: “If you lend money to a poor person and take his only coat as security ……if he cries out to me I will listen for I am merciful.”    22:27: Don’t curse God (or: judges)…..    Why this juxtaposition?  And if God is merciful, why should people need to curse God?   Perhaps it is saying; when in trouble don’t curse God, pray to God! (If you cry out to me I will listen for I am merciful).

'כפה עליהם הר כגיגית'.

בני ישראל בחרו לקבל את התורה באמרם "נעשה ונשמע" ובכך גם זכו לקבלה וגם בכך ניתנה הרשות לקב"ה לכוף עליהם 'הר כגיגית    (already agreed upon was it :And that's why a forced transaction like that can have validity)

ויכוח משה לזכות בתורה

במדרש כתוב שהמלאכים התווכחו עם ה' כדי למנוע נתינת התורה לבני אדם. אבל הרי רק בני אדם מסוגלים לקיים מצוות ­ אז למה התווכחו!

משה היה צריך להוכיח שהוא רוצה את התורה ולהראות שבני אדם זכאים לקבלה. ובכך הצריכו המלאם אותו לעבור 'מבחן': הועלתה האפשרות לוותר על התורה ל'טובת המלאכים'. ובזה שמשה התווכח ולא ויתר זכה לקבל את התורה לעצמו ולשאר בני האדם.

אולי גם רצו המלאכים לראות האם משה רבנו שנון מספיק כדי ללמוד תורה לחדש חידושים לפסוק הלכות ­ ובחנו אותו בוויכוח שלהם.

………………………………………………………………………………….........................................

"מדבר שקר תרחק"(23:7)

מה זה "דבר שקר"! אם זה שקר אז למה "דבר שקר". ובדומה "לא תטה משפט". הרי אם עושים הטיה אין זה כלל משפט.

אלא שיש מקרה שכדי לעשות משפט חייבים לכאורה להטות אותו. מתי? אם כל הדיינים מחייבים בדיני נפשות יוצא הנאשם לחופשי או לכלא אבל לא למוות.                קריאת גזר הדין ע"י השופטים נעשית מהקטן אל הבכיר ז"א לא נותנים כולם את הגזר דין בבת אחת. עקב כך יכול להתעורר מצב שכל דיינים מחייבים עד שמגיעים לדיין האחרון. ואז האחרון יודע שאם יחייב ילך הנאשם לחופש ­ ואם יזכה ידון למוות! אזי בכדי לעשות משפט אם הוא חושב שהנאשם חייב ומגיע לו מוות עליו דווקא לזכות אותו. ואם הוא חושב שהוא זכאי וצריך ללכת חופשי עליו לחייב את הנאשם! אומרת לנו התורה שזה אסור ­ צריך להגיד את האמת אפילו אם זה יגרום לעיוות בעיני השופט.

.............................................................................................................................................................................

An Eye for an Eye ['lex talionis’]

1. Mike Gerver wrote (MailJewish): Hammurabi's code allows monetary compensation for taking a life.

A)     The fact that the Torah has to spell out explicitly that you cannot atone for murder by monetary compensation, only by being executed, also suggests that at the time of matan Torah, the plain meaning of phrases like "nefesh tachat nefesh" and "ayin tachat ayin" was monetary compensation.

B)      The fact that the Torah did not allow monetary compensation for murder was revolutionary-- In Hammurabi's time, a rich person could kill a poor person with impunity.

2. Rav. Aryeh Carmel points out[12] : this phrase can perhaps be better understood from an examination of a similar case in the Torah where punishment seemingly meant to be corporeal is in actuality financial. Immediately after the Torah tells us an eye for an eye an interesting law is presented.[13]  If an animal kills a person after the owner had been warned to watch his animal due to its previous violence, the animal must be killed, and the owner as well. However, the Torah adds, if the owner wishes  to pay a fine rather than being executed, he may. Cleary all people in that situation will prefer a fine, and therefore the Torah's wording seems rather odd. However, the Torah may perhaps be indicating a dual approach - one to the level of responsibility, and the other to the mode of penalty. That is, the owner is morally responsible for the death of the person his animal killed, but the penalty is not death since it was not he himself who committed the killing, and it was not his intent that the person be killed. This case of the violent animal and its negligent owner is presented directly after the case of a wound inflicted on a person, where the "eye for an eye" law is stated. Perhaps then one should understand the “eye for an eye” in the context of case of the violent animal: the Torah is stating that the moral responsibility of the person who inflicted the wound is perhaps great enough to have warranted that the same wound be inflicted on him, and therefore it uses the phrase ‘an eye for an eye’, but since this is not in consonance with the Torah principle of justice with mercy, he must pay financial damages instead.

The Writing of the Torah

24:4 MR wrote “vayichtov” all the words of God   24:7 MR took the book “sefer (haBris)”

When were the creation accounts and stories of the Avot written down by Moshe Rabbenu?

According to the Talmud[14], God told Moshe the various sections of the Torah at different times. Then, at the end of the forty years in the desert, Moshe compiled the sections into one unified Torah. According to one view[15], as each section was told to Moshe, he wrote it down exactly, and compiled the Torah from these written records. According to another view[16], the sections were memorized by Moshe as they were given, and were only recorded in writing  when the last section had been given[17]. At that point, Moshe compiled the Torah from the memorized portions.

For example, according to Ramban, Genesis [and more] was recorded by Moshe after he came down from Mt. Sinai. However, the last eight passages of the Torah - dealing with the death of Moshe - were written by Yehoshua.

Ramban notes that Moshe  wrote the Torah anonymously - that is, without saying at the beginning of Genesis something like "these are the words which I Moses have written..."[18]. According to Ramban, this was because the words he wrote in the Torah had already been written before[19], and therefore Moshe was "like a scribe who copies from an old book".

The book of Deuteronomy records Moshe's words to the Jewish People prior to their entry into the Land of Israel. According to one interpretation, the book was written by Moshe, at God's command, as the record of Moshe's speeches. That is, either the speeches had been recorded at the time of their utterance, and then God commanded that every word be entered into the Torah, or God instructed Moshe to write it down from his [perfect] memory, or God dictated to Moshe a verbatim transcript of Moshe's words.

Historical Records available to Moshe

According to the Midrash the Jews in Egypt used to study special scrolls with material regarding the history of their forefathers[20]. In addition, there are various references in the Bible to works which are seemingly not part of the Bible itself[21], and it is known that at the time that the Bible was canonized, there were many works which were rejected, some for being partially - rather than fully -  of prophetic origin or written under the influence of the divine spirit.

 According to Tradition, the Patriarchs were part of a line of tradition from Adam down to Moshe. One can assume in such a case that Adam knew of some creation account, and that this creation account was transmitted to his descendants as part of an oral or written tradition. At some time, it might also have been written down. Similarly, the account of the flood, and the events which occurred to the Patriarchs, would be recorded by those who experienced these events - all of them being prophets.

         For example, as Rambam states[22]:  "There were prophets before Moses, as the patriarchs Shem, Eber, Noakh, Meshuselakh, and Khanokh...."

 These accounts would also perhaps be recorded in written form - if not by the actual protagonists, then at least by their descendants. These accounts would then be added to the existing tradition.

According to the Midrash[23] the Torah was given in separate scrolls, and the Torah from Genesis up to the giving of the Torah was written already before the giving of the Torah, being events being recorded as they occurred.  The complete tradition would be transmitted to every succeeding generation - at the very least to the leaders and Elders of every generation. Thus, the entire tradition would have become available eventually to Moshe, after the Elders recognized him as God's messenger.

Therefore, the material in the Bible prior to the exodus – or related material - would presumably have been known to Moshe, from the tradition transmitted to him (see Midrash Rabbah, Shmot 5:22). Events from that point on would be known to him as a contemporary, and as the protagonist of most of the events[24]. Thus in effect, even though God dictated to Moshe the entire Torah, it may very well have been physically possible for Moshe to have written the narrative elements of the Torah without God's dictation, by combining the various traditional material at his disposal[25]. However, the choice of what to include, and the method of combining the various elements, would not be self-evident[26]. And, any resulting document would not be a Torah - it would be Moshe's edited version of human origins, and of Jewish history. However, if Moshe included material only at God's express command, in the manner dictated by God[27], with the inclusion of the Divinely mandated laws, then this could become the Torah when it would be re-dictated by God.

This may indeed be the way that God told Moshe to write the Torah. If so, then one should not be surprised at claims that individual accounts are coloured by the perspectives and understandings of the people involved in the recording of the events[28]. Since these accounts were initially recorded not by God, and not via Moshe who had a higher form of prophecy, but by earlier prophets at the time of the events or later, then although they were under the influence of Divine inspiration, the result could still reflect their individual psyches and approaches[29]. Indeed scholars claim that when analyzed as literature the various narratives in the Torah do seem to be presented in varying ‘writing styles’, with seemingly various perceptions of the way that God interacts with humanity, and with varying names for God (or for the manifestation of God): although of course there are many reasons given in Traditional sources for all this, the above may also be offered as a reason. None of this of course detracts from the holiness imbued in each word.  

INCOMPLETE: Relating two odd passages

·         Don’t ascend on stairs to the mizbeach, not to reveal nakedness.[ final passage of the previous parsha – Yitro – (20:23)]

·         “they saw the God of Israel and under His feet, like the ….” [Near the end of this week’s parsha (Mishpatim) (24:10):]

……………………………………………………………………..

Contemporary writers: God and Moshe:    vayisaper/sefer, vayichtov/katavti, vayikra/vayikra

24:3 MR told the People “vayisaper” the words of God

24:4                                                      MR wrote “vayichtov” all the words of God

Mishpatim               [30]

…………………..

22:20: “Don’t oppress gerim, because you were gerim in Egypt”. (repeated with some addition in 23:9)

22:20-23: Don’t oppress the widow and orphan ………….or I will make your wives widows and your children orphans”.

…………..

“Don’t oppress gerim, because you were gerim in Egypt”.

There is no logical necessity, since we do not do everything god did: it is like “rest on the 7^th day because I rested”. So what is the special message? ….

………

22:24: Implies that usury is only when lending to the poor

…

23:15-17: stresses the seasonal/agricultural aspects of the three regalim (Spring = pesach, reaping=shavuot, and harvest=succot)

…………..

23:10-19: talks of the three cycles of 6+1: shmitta = 7 years, shabbos=7 days, the holidays including shavuot and bikurim= 7 weeks (but doesn’t mention seven weeks explicitly)  (see also 34:22)

…….

Mentions gerim at all points, and then also when says what to say on holidays “arami oved ovi” etc… mentions gerim again.

……………..

………..

Yitsro/Mishpatim/Terumah

…………………………

Yitro

Seeing (what you're hearing) is believing

Two questions arise: in some sense one is the answer to the other.

1) The first commandment is: “I am the Lord Your God”. Since this is a commandment rather than a statement it would most likely be considered as an injunction against accepting some other power as God, ie it is inherently a commandment forbidding idolatry, however if so why was the second commandment, immediately following - about idolatry?

2) At the time that the Jewish People were standing at Sinai and heard this commandment, there was lightening and thunder and the sound of the shofar blasting (from heaven), and it says that the Jewish People “saw the sounds”! Why did God have the people experience this strange sensation (synesthesia)?

Answers:

·        As a result of all the mighty and mysterious sounds at the time of the giving of the first commandment, there may have been the possibility that people would confuse the sights and sounds for God, and try afterwards to recreate the experience of God via tangible objects or art, and so the second commandment was not only: “Thou shalt not have any other gods before me” but also “don’t make any statues or pictures of anything in the heavens.” 

·        The fact that the people were able to see the sounds helped ensure that they’d understand that their senses alone could never recreate the experience of God; furthermore they would never be able accept a picture or statue - which would of course not on its own give rise to synesthesia - as a representation of God. Thus this sensory anomaly was the appropriate accompaniment to the first two commandments.

The Content and Order of the Ten Commandments

The content and order of the ten commandments can be seen as parallel to, and perhaps motivated by, the essence and order of 10 significant events in the history of existence/humanity/the Jewish People, starting from the creation and up to the receiving of the Torah at Sinai:

·        The beginning of history is: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth”: this introduces God as creator and all-powerful: as a result we have the first commandment: “I am the Lord Your God”

·        The creation account relates that God made the sun, moon and stars: these were later to become the focus of the earliest idolatry (worship of the sun, moon and stars) and therefore we have the second commandment: Thou shalt have no other gods”

·        The exile from resulted from a chain of events beginning with the snake’s misquoting God’s purpose in forbidding the Tree of Knowledge (“Even though God said ....”), thereby tricking Eve, and then Eve’s misquoting God’s command (“God said we can’t eat or touch it...”: she may have been misled by Adam, who told her that it was not only forbidden to eat of the Tree but even to touch it): also the sake said “You shall be as gods”: using God’s name (and the concept of God) in these ways brought disaster, and so we have the third commandment: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord your God in vain”.

·        The next event of significance was the onset of the first Sabbath: and so the fourth commandment is: “Remember the Sabbath to keep it holy”.

Note that the events prior to the expulsion are parallel to the four commandments which involve the relationship between Humanity and God, while the next six commandments correspond to events after the exile from Eden, when Humanity began its normal physical existence, and so relate to the relationship of people to other people.

·        The next event of significance: Adam and Eve give birth: the existence of children brings with it the need for the fifth commandment: “Honor thy Father and Mother”.

·        The next significant event: the onset of sibling rivalry, and violence:  unfortunately, the first child to be born murders the second, and so the next commandment is: “Thou shalt not commit Murder”.

·        In Genesis 6:2 we are told of the degeneration leading to the Flood: the powerful princes and others taking women “whomever they desired” (Rashi: even married women): and so the next commandment is: “Though shalt not commit adultery”.

·        In Genesis 6:11 we are told that the reason for the flood was that in the time of Noah the Earth was full of ‘chamas’ (Rashi: theft)[31]: and so the next commandment is: “Thou shalt not steal”

·        The commandments were given immediately after the Exodus from Egypt: the exile in Egypt began with the sale of Joseph: Joseph bore slanderous news of his brothers to his father, and they coveted his special position in the eyes of his father, as exemplified by Jacob’s giving him the coat of many colors: and thus the next two commandments are: “Thou shalt not bear false witness” and “Thou shalt not covet”.    

The 10 Commandments and the Shabbat/Garden of Eden Account[32]

Beginning from the Shabbat and working through the Eden story in chronological order, we find a parallel between the events there and the 10 commandments: the first two are as above[33], the rest are different:

·        Eve is created: now that there are two people in the world, Humanity needs to be taught “Thou shalt not commit Murder”.

·        After the creation of Eve Man is commanded “Therefore shall Man leave his father and mother (and cling to his wife)”: it is therefore most appropriate that Man be warned to nevertheless “Honor thy Father and Mother”.

·        Eve and the snake, and perhaps Adam also, twisted God’s words, and so:  “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.

·        The snake told Eve that if they eat of the forbidden Tree: “You shall be as gods”: and so: “Thou shalt have no other gods”.

·        Genesis 3:6 says that Eve saw that the Tree was good to eat and beautiful, as well as “nechmad”, a word with the same form as “tachmod”, the word for “covet” in the ten commandments: and so: “Thou shalt not covet”

·        Adam and Eve ate of the Tree that was forbidden to them: and so: “Thou shalt not steal”.

·        After eating of the Tree Adam and Eve became aware of sexuality: and so “Though shalt not commit adultery”.[34]

·        When confronted by God, Adam blamed Eve for the eating (according to some commentators this was the sin for which he was banished from Eden). Since he accused her although it was actually his own decision to accept the fruit from her and eat: “Thou shalt not bear false witness”

Moses’ Meddling Father in Law (no mention of the mother-in-law here?!)

Moses leaves his wife and children with his father in law Yitro back in Midyan, so that he can be free to lead the people out of Egypt. Yitro then brings them to him in the desert, and Moses greets him. We are not even told of Moses getting to say hello to his wife and children yet. Yitro sees how busy he is, and gives Moses good advice about appointing assistants, judges etc to carry the major part of the load he had on his shoulders.

Yitro is a wise father-in-law: he wants his daughter and grandchildren to have their husband and father, and so he gives advice to Moses which allows him to spend more time with them (his wife and children)[35].

Time Transcendence and Self Reference

As presented in the Torah, the order of events surrounding the giving of the ten commandments (and other parts of the Torah) [19:19-20:1, 20:15-20:20 etc] is very confusing. Perhaps because the central event transcended time; also, it is necessarily causally-puzzling since it is self-referential - a description in the Torah of the giving of the Torah. [It is prefigured by the strange out-of-synch element, the repetition of the last words of 18:8 in 18:9 {“ha’am el Hashem” rather than its reverse “Hashem el ha’am}]

Safe on a Technicality

The people didn’t want to hear the commandments from God directly: they said “lest we die”. Perhaps they meant that they did not want to be liable to the death penalty for violating the commandments and so wanted to hear them from Moshe R rather than directly!

Perhaps this is why indeed they were not all killed after the incident of the golden calf.

Immediately after the end of the giving of the 10 commandments, in 20:19 God tells Moshe R to tell the people “you saw that I spoke from the heavens, do not have any other gods [You heard me speak from the heavens, so you know I am the only God, so do not indulge in idolatry]”, thus reviewing the first two commandments which they had heard while cowering in fear, afraid to hear.

In some sense this is a separate injunction from the commandments, in some sense it is a repetition or reinforcement (now they couldn’t claim to have been so cowed by the first commandments that they didn’t understand them).

Interfaith Dialogue

Yitro hears of the great events which occurred to Moshe R and to the Jewish People, and he comes, bringing Tzipporah and their two sons. He is overwhelmed at what MR tells him of what occurred. Before returning to his native Midyan:

·        Yitro the Midyanite priest becomes (18:10) the 2^nd recorded individual – neither of them Jewish (the 1^st is Eliezer) - to say “boruch hashem”;

·        he expresses the idea that God punished the Egyptians according to mida ke-neged midah, and that this sets God apart from other gods  (18:11);

·        he (a priest of Midyan, not part of the Jewish People) brings a sacrifice to God;

·        Ahron and the elders break bread with him – the Midianite priest - ‘in the presence of (?) God’ (18:12);

·        The Midyanite priest then revolutionizes Moshe R’s method of jurisprudence and consultation with God on behalf of the people.

Like Daughter, like Father

In 18:2 we are told that Moshe R had ‘sent’ his wife;

In 18:27 we are told that Moshe R ‘sent’ his father in law.

In neither case is it clear what happened or why.

It is interesting to note in this connection that for some reason God wanted Pharaoh to ‘send’ the Jewish people out of Egypt, and indeed the name of the previous parsha is ‘sending” [“when (Pharaoh was) sending (the Jewish People out of Egypt)”]

[There’s some parallel as well to the ‘chased away’ that figures earlier (Moshe R chased the harassing shepherd)]

Mishkan and Breishis

Veshachanti BeSocham: God’s presence fills the universe, and fills humans: mishkan is connection.

Eagle Airlines

19:4: God says that in taking the Jews out of Egypt he carried the Jewish people on the wings of Eagles: indeed God says “You saw what I did to Egypt, and that I carried you on the wings of Eagles and took you to me”. Of course this passage is highly enigmatic; however we can infer that the ‘wings of eagles’ in the messianic context need be no more literal than the one at the Exodus.

Shma Yisrael

Shma Yisrael contains these first two commandments. B”Y heard only these two, m”r repeats what God said re halevay b”y would always fear God as they did a tSinai, m”r then reminds them of this fear and therefore then speaks davka of “ve’ahavta”. Also, Shma has hashem and elokim =   love + awe.

Teruma

אולי 'שמים' הינו החלק הרוחני שבעולם הנבראים דהיינו המשכן וארץ הינו שאר הברואים החומריים

ואז בריאת העולם והמשכן נעשו באותו זמן על ידי אותן המלאכות. ומכאן אם ה' צווה לבני ישראל לבנות את המשכן באותו צורה שה' ברא אותו אזי מלאכות המשכן הם מלאכות בריאת שמים וארץ ובשבת בו שבת ה' ממלאכות שמים וארץ שובתים בני ישראל ממלאכות בריאת העולם מלאכות בנית המשכן.

Mishkan: Blatant Non-Sequitar

Given that we are commanded to keep Shabbat because God rested from creation, that which we should rest from doing on Shabbat should be the melachot God used in creation!

Clearly then, there must be a close connection between the melachot of building the mishkan and creating the universe.

Indeed a close examination reveals MANY parallels in the words of the Shabbat commandments and the mishkan, and in the celebration of the seventh day at the end of 6 days of work; in fact an analysis of the words in the creation (and Eden) account reveals parallels to all the 39 melachot. (full article available)

Veshachanti Betocham: God/Universe/Human/Mishkan

Although the physical and spiritual are different, and the spiritual cannot be ‘located in’ something physical, there is nevertheless an association of the two (mind/body problem)

·        The universe is a physical entity housing God’s presence

·        The human body is a physical construct housing the soul, an aspect of the divine.

·        The mishkan is a physical construct housing God’s presence: or more precisely, allowing for the presence of God to connect with that aspect of God’s presence which is ‘inside’ us (is our sessence).

an Important Principle  :Interpreting the Words of the Sages

לא היה בן סורר ומורה לעולם

לפי הגמרא לא היה בן סורר ומורה לעולם. אבל ר' יוחנן אמר שהוא בעצמו ישב על קברו של בן סורר ומורה. ר' עקיבא איגר שואל הכיצד זה אפשרי הרי ר' יוחנן היה כהן ואפילו לישראל אסור לשבת על קבר.

תירוץ א': מפי סבי הרב חיים אליעזר סמסון זצ"ל: הרוגי בי"ד נקברו בבית הקברות של בי"ד אבל לאחר זמן הועבר קברם לבי"ק המשפחתי. בגלל שעברו כמאה וחמישים שנה מאז שהופסק הדיון בדיני נפשות לימיו של ר' יוחנן בודאי שבזמנו לא רק שהיה הקבר ריק אלא גם כל בשר שהיה נשאר בקבר כבר שב לאפר. עקב כך לא היה איסור לשבת על הקבר לא ישראל ולא לכהן.

תירוץ ב': אפשר להבין את אימרת ר' יוחנן גם לפי דעות בגמרא לא היה יכול להיות מקרה של בן סורר ומורה והפרשה נכללה בתורה למוסר בלבד. שלא ייקחו נשים מיפות תואר וכו'. אבל אם ידע העם שבן סורר ומורה הוא בלתי אפשרי במציאות לא יהיה בזה טעם וישראל כלל לא ילמדו את המסר שהם צריכים ללמוד מהפרשה. עקב כך ר' יוחנן רצה להגיד משהו שיהיה פירושו להמון שיש בן סורר ומורה ופירושו לחכמים שאיננו קיים בן סורר ומורה. עקב הקביעה שלא היה ולא נברא בן סורר ומורה והוא רצה לתת את הסכמתו לקביעה זו הכריז ר' יוחנן שישב על קבר של בן סורר וזה כדי שיחשבו העם שבן סורר ומורה הינו אפשרי. אבל החכמים הבינו שזה היה רק מעין אזהרה ברוח אזהרת התורה בפרשת בן סורר ומורה עצמה ­ כי הרי אסור לשבת על קבר ובמיוחד ר' יוחנן שהיה כהן ונאסר אפילו להיכנס לבית הקברות בכלל.

תירוץ ג': אפשר גם להבין את אימרת ר' יוחנן ­ שאכן ישב על "קבר של בן סורר ומורה". אלא שכדי שלא יזניחו המסר של התורה ע"י כך שיגידו שבן סורר ומורה איננו אפשרי הקימו חז"ל מציבה על קבר ריק עליו כתוב "כאן נקבר בן סורר ומורה". ועל הקבר הזה ישב ר' יוחנן.

איך ידעו חכמים שלא היה בן סורר ומורה לעולם! אולי מסיפורו של ר' יוחנן. מכיוון שחכמים ידעו שאילו היה קבר כזה לא היה ר' יוחנן יושב עליו ידעו הם שהוא דיבר בלשון משל אבל ההמון לא ידע זאת. ע"י אמרתו שישב על הקבר מחזק הוא את המוסר וגם מרמז לחכמים שגם אם ישנו קבר של בן סורר ומורה הרי הקבר הוא ריק והוקם רק למטרת מוסר לעם.

Megillat Esther

God in the Megillah

Although God is not mentioned, it is clear that when Mordechai admonishes Esther, goading her to intervene with Ahashverosh, he was refering to a divine plan:

·        “maybe this was the reason you became queen”;

·        “if you do NOT act, you and your family will be destroyed”

·        “salvation will come from another quarter”. 

Esther then shows that she recognizes the aspect of divine intervention: she asks that the Jews to fast in order to merit that she not be killed by Ahashverosh.

Jews DO Rule by Proxy!!

There are VERY many parallels between Mordechai and Yosef, and the words and actions in their stories.

Not just the essential fact of a Jew rising to prominence due to his timely intervention/advice but even the details such as being paraded on a horse, and that Esther did not reveal her identity just like Yosef did not reveal his identity to Paraoh. (A full version of this is available).

HenPecked

Haman (Memuchan) advised that the law of the land place husbands in a superior position to their wives but/because in his household his wife Zeresh was clearly in charge.

Mordechai Chooses Confrontation

Mordechai insisted on not bowing to Haman; the king’s servants noticed this and mentioned it to him over and over 3:3-4. Note that Mordechai’s non-bowing was not noticed directly by Haman, it was only brought to Haman’s attention by the kings’s servants after Mordechai did not listen to them when they confronted him repeatedly on this issue.

Fickleness

one of these servants later brought about Haman’s hanging.

Memuchan and Haman

One can see parallels between the reactions of the king’s advisor:

• Haman, regarding Mordechai;
• Memuchan, regarding Vashti:

Making a rebellion issue out of

• Vashti’s refusal to come;

·        Mordechai’s refusal to bow.

The rebellion was not just personal

·        Mordechai against Haman

·        Vashti against the king

Rather, the rebellion of was generalized, involving

·        Women rather than an individual woman

·        Jews, rather than an individual Jew

And the rebellion threated the king and the Persian Empire.

In both cases a decree was promulgated throughout the Empire, directed against:

• all women rather than just Vashti,
• all Jews rather than just Mordechai.

Indeed Tradition considers Memuchan and Haman to be the same person.

Note: Mordechai insisted on not bowing to Haman even after the king’s servants mentioned it over and over 3:3-4.

Mel Gibson and Haman: Blaming all the Jews for the actions of one or a few

Mordechai must have claimed exemption from bowing since he was a Jew. Since Mordechai made it into an issue of Judaism rather than him himself, and since the servants realized there was a power confrontation involved, this led Haman to take this seriously, and to decree against all Jews and Judaism rather than just Mordechai.

מגילת אסתר

"ליהודים היתה אורה ושמחה וששון..." "ששון ושמחה". פעמיים מופיעה המילה "ששון" שאותיותיה "שושן".

……………..

מקבילות

אסתר: ב:יז: "ויהי אמן את הדסה היא אסתר בת דודו"

כ: יב: "וגם אמנה אחתי בת אבי היא".

………..

More to follow re Keruvim etc.

………….

Ki Tisa

Facing God: Progression

After looking at the burning bush, Moshe Rabbenu (MR) hid his face in fear of looking at God [3:6].

By the time of our portion MR has spoken to God many times and led the Jewish People for a while, and we are told [33:11] that the encounters between God and MR are “face to face as people talk to each other” . And then at the end of our portion, after an encounter with God “MR’s face shone”: “karan or panav” [39:29-35][37], and people hid their faces from him in fear.

Thus MR was able to grow to the point that he could accept God’s presence directly and not hide his face, but in doing so he became such that those speaking to him had to now hide their face.

Exchanging Commitments: Mida KeNeged Mida

• The Jewish People told Moses about keeping God’s commandments:

               “Every thing which God said, we will do”

• In our portion, God replied to Moses regarding the request for God’s direct leadership of the Jewish People:  “Also this thing which you said, I will do” (33:17)

What’s the Hurry?

34: 8 “And Moses made haste, and bowed his head toward the earth, and worshipped.”

Why did MR hurry?

Answer: MR asked God to reveal the divine attributes of Mercy, but it was a time more appropriate to judgement due to what had transpired regarding the golden calf, and so what began as a revelation of Mercy turned into an outpouring of Anger:

34: 6: “And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed: 'The LORD, the LORD, God, merciful and gracious ….. keeping mercy … forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin…. and clearing the accounts (God) will not, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and unto the fourth generation.”

At this point MR quickly bowed and worshipped to stem the flow of Judgement Attributes before it could continue.

On the high holidays we recite this passage and strangely enough truncate the first of these Judgement attributes and annex the first part to the list of Merciful Attributes, so that it reads as though  it were part of the Merciful ones! We read it as:

34: 6: “'The LORD, the LORD, God, merciful and gracious ….. keeping mercy … forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin…. and clearing the accounts”!

How can we do this, deliberately taking the word out of context and distorting, actually reversing, its meaning?!

Answer: MR not only stemmed the flow by quickly bowing, he thus indicated that he did not accept them because he had requested only the Merciful attributes, and since this first word could be understood as part of the Mercy attributes, he gave the power for all generations to consider this word as part of the Merciful section.  (Note: This is all in character and a propos: in this portion MR tells God that he does not want to be in the Torah if God is not forgiving to the Jewish People.)

………..

Obscurity of the Central Rituals/Prohibitions of the Major Holidays

A) If someone who never heard of Pesach was given the Torah’s record of the exodus and the passages mentioning the motivation for the week-long holiday of Pesach, what would they likely guess would form the central aspect of the holiday? Probably something reminding one of the slavery and something reminding of the plagues, perhaps the special sacrifice on the night of departure, and the passage through the Re(e)d Sea.

Why is it so important that the Jewish People had to leave in such a hurry that the bread didn’t have time to rise? This seems like a trivial detail, why commemorate the fact?. Is it sufficient justification for carefully cleaning the house of all leaven? For specifically eating that which the unrisen bread turned into, ie matza? Why not have instead similarly complex Torah-mandated rituals based on commemorating the slavery, or the liberation, or the plagues, or the splitting of the sea? And why make the purging of risen dough (hametz) such a central element??!!

B) A person who never encountered the concept of Shabbat is shown the creation account, and God’s command to observe the Shabbat in commemoration of this; they might guess that cessation of weekly activity would be a central aspect of the observance, as indeed it is, but would certainly not guess that those activities to desist from are those which were required for the construction of the mishkan!

C) In none of the descriptions of the 40-year sojourn in the desert does the Torah EVER explicitly mention that the Jewish People were seated by God in succot/’booths’! Strangely enough, only in the actual command to observe succot are we told that there was such a thing.

The Torah tells often about miracles occurring in the desert: the daily fall of the ‘mon’ (‘manna’/all-purpose bread from heaven), the fowl and water from rocks which miraculously appeared at various junctures, the cloud which protected them from the arrows of the pursuing Egyptian army and which stayed with them throughout their time in the desert, the pillar of fire which led them, and several other miraculous events, but not of the booths. Why should a week-long holiday involving such effort, building the succah, and eating and even sleeping in it, be established around a part of the desert experience which is seemingly so insignificant/obscure that it is never mentioned. Why not have Torah-mandated rituals celebrating the oft-mentioned miracles listed above?

·        And vice versa.: why is it such a miracle that they had booths to shelter them from the sun? After all, there was a highly advanced civilization around them (Egypt etc). 

·        Doesn’t the Torah consistently imply that the Jewish People lived in tents rather than huts?

·        If it was indeed a miracle to have booths, and the miracle of the booths was not obscure, but was so significant that a week-long holiday would be established forever commemorating this, then why was it not mentioned along with the other miracles?

What do the four species mentioned in the Torah have to do with the holiday (if there is a reason, why doesn’t the Torah say it explicitly)?

No connection at all is drawn explicitly in the Torah between the concept of the cloud and the holiday of succot. If we rely only on the written torah, the mnemonic, then of course the meaning for the rituals will be obscure; however this meaning was self-evident to people of the time, and is made available to us via the oral torah.

The Jewish People were commanded to eat matza immediately prior to the exodus, as part of the Pascal sacrifice, so matza was associated with Passover before the hurried departure from Egypt!

would commemorate the whole Egypt experience and exodus from it,

To those who participated in the actual Exodus the haste of departure was a very significant and meaningful element of the Exodus, and the double significance of matza was clear to them. As a result, the reason for making this haste and its consequence such a central theme of a major holiday was clear and did not need mention in the Torah. The reason was experiential and perhaps could not be felt as strongly by those who did not directly experience it, but perhaps we can attach ourselves to it via observance/experience of the ritual. The non-experiential aspect would presumably be passed on orally as a tradition from generation to generation, but after three and a half thousand years the reason is now lost, or is to be found in mystical texts, midrash and so on. (See full article for expansion of this issue.)

Sabbath is mandated by the Torah both as a commemoration of the creation and also ‘zecher leyittsiat mittzrayim” in commemoration of the Exodus form Egypt, and indeed Shabbat is a perfect way to celebrate overcoming various types of slavery (especially to celebrate by spiritual pursuits). As a result, this aspect of the cessation of slavery is not necessarily incorporated in a major way into Pesach.

One can obtain a glimpse of the symbolic meaning of chametz and matza by tracing their appearance in the Torah: a systematic trace shows that chametz and bread are associated with negativity. See full article.

People who experienced the wandering through the desert, the uncertainty of life there, the closeness of the divine presence, and the protection afforded by the ‘anan’ knew what the ‘succah’ represented, and understood why the miracle of God’s anan was such as to merit an annual week-long holiday. To those of us who are removed from that by several thousand years, and are limited only to the mnemonics, the reason for the holiday, or its meaning, may be obscure; to those with a connection to the Tradition passed on from generation to generation originating with those who experienced the cloud of glory, the meaning is very clear.

………..

Shabbat Zachor

1) The Bnei Yisrael were commanded to destroy the sheva umot. Is this not like H/H’s actions?

Answer: There’s no record in historical sources of the destruction of these peoples, and so the only way we know that it happened is from the Torah, but the Torah states that it was God’s command. If one does not accept the document’s claim that there is a God, creator of the universe and arbiter of justice and mercy, who commanded this act, then it is inconsistent to accept the document’s validity as to the fact that this act took place.

[In addition, as with the story of the flood, where Tradition states that it was not universal (was not in Israel, did not kill Og etc) despite the plain language stating that it was, the plain language implication of total destruction of a nation may also be modified.]

2) Agag’s descendant H[38] determined to take revenge by doing to the Jews that Shaul had done to them:

  וְהֵמַתָּה מֵאִישׁ עַד-אִשָּׁה, מֵעֹלֵל וְעַד-יוֹנֵק[שמואל א פרק ט:] from the haftorah (Shabbat zachor)

לְהַשְׁמִיד לַהֲרֹג וּלְאַבֵּד אֶת-כָּל-הַיְּהוּדִים מִנַּעַר וְעַד-זָקֵן טַף וְנָשִׁים   from the megilla

עמלק וישראל

[39]ביחסים שבין עמלק וישראל ישנן מקבילויות בתנ"ך. התחלת האיבה בין עמלק וישראל הינה התחרות שבין עשו ­ סבו של עמלק ­ לבין יעקב; ופעם אחרונה שמוזכרת בתנ"ך הייתה בימי מרדכי ואסתר. חז"ל בב"ר מציינים הקבלה זו, שהרי

·                     על עשו נאמר: "כשמע עשו את דברי אביו ויצעק צעקה גדלה ומרה עד מאד" (בראשית כו לד),

·                     ועל מרדכי נאמר: "ויקרע מרדכי את בגדיו וילבש שק ואפר... ויזעק זעקה גדלה ומרה" (אסתר ד א).

בדומה לכך,

·                     על עשו נאמר: "ויבז עשו את הבכרה" (בראשית כה לד)

·                     ועל המן נאמר: "ויבז בעיניו לשלח יד במרדכי לבדו" (אסתר ג ו).

·                     ביחס לעשו, סבו של עמלק, נאמר: "ויצעק צעקה גדלה ומרה"

·                     ביחס לבני ישראל מיד לאחר קריעת ים סוף נאמר: "ולא יכלו לשתת מים ממרה... קרא שמה מרה... ויצעק אל ה'" (שמות טו כג­כה).

 ייתכן שהקבלה זו מצביעה על כך שבני ישראל נענשו ע"י זרעו של עשו שהציק להם: מיד אח"כ התלוננו על האוכל ואמרו: "מי יתן מותנו ביד ה' בארץ מצרים... כי הוצאתם אתנו... להמית את כל הקהל הזה ברעב" (שם טז ג). תגובת ה': "שמעתי את תלונת בני ישראל... השלו... דק מחספס... מן הוא" (שם שם יב­טו). לכך תגובת ישראל היא: "ולא שמעו אל משה ויותרו אנשים ממנו עד בקר... ויהי ביום השביעי יצאו מן העם ללקט ולא מצאו" (שם שם כ­כז). תגובת ה' למעשה זה: "ויאמר ה'... עד אנה מאנתם לשמר מצותי ותורתי... ובני ישראל אכלו את המן" (שם שם כח­לה). לפי החיד"א? 'המן' הינו רמז להמן בזמן מרדכי ואסתר.לאחר מכן: "וירב העם עם משה... תנו לנו מים... למה זה העליתנו ממצרים... ויצעק משה אל ה'" (שם יז ב­ד) ומיד: "ויבא עמלק וילחם עם ישראל" (שם שם ח).

·                     [40]על עשו נאמר: "ויבא עשו מן השדה והוא עיף... הלעיטני נא... ויבז עשו את הבכרה" (בראשית כה כט­לד)

·                     וה' אומר על ישראל ביחס לעמלק: "ואתה עיף ויגע ולא ירא א-להים" (דברים כה יח).

·                     ולשון עיף ויגע משתקף בלשון "ויחלש יהושע את עמלק ואת עמו לפי חרב" (שמות יז יג).

·                     כן: "וכאשר יניח ידו וגבר עמלק וידי משה כבדים" (שם שם יא­יב), שהיה עיף ויגע מכדי להרים את ידו.

The Central Misunderstanding Behind Antisemitic Conspiracy Theories

The truth of course is that many Jews are indeed in positions of great power and have greatly influenced the course of historical events. What is untrue is that:

·        they are organized to operate with a common agenda;

·        this agenda is to the detriment of humanity.

The truth is just the opposite.

[Imagine there was a tiny minority of green-haired people in the world, spread across the globe, and they were everywhere influencing events at the highest levels, and had organizations for green-haired people with branches across the globe, and had been organized for thousands of years and had started religions and political movements for thousands of years. Who wouldn’t believe there was a sinister conspiracy involved? ]

Conspiracy Theorists and Holocaust denial

Ironically anti-semites hate the Jews, would like to see them destroyed, but at the same time deny the Holocaust took place!

The reason for this is that it’s difficult to maintain that the Jews run the world if it was so easy for Hitler to nearly kill them all out! And so it becomes so important to deny the reality of the Holocaust.

And the myth of the Holocaust is so widespread, it must be a powerful conspiracy indeed.

All protests against Holocaust-denial, although necessary, have the effect also of further strengthening the antisemites since they indicate the depth of the Jewish conspiracy to promote the hoax of the Holocaust – imagine how powerful the Jews are if even the Germans themselves have been coerced into claiming that they themselves perpetrated it, and are forced to outlaw Holocaust-denial in their own country!

Anti-Jewish Conspiracy theories in the past and today

·        Pharaoh plotted with his advisers to enslave the Jews because he believed they would join with is enemies at the time of an invasion;

·        Haman convinced Achashverosh that Vashti’s actions could launch an open conspiracy of women against men in the Persian empire, and he convinced Achashverosh that the Jews were disloyal elements, implying that they were thus a danger to the Empire;

·        The Romans killed Jesus, and their descendants later converted to Christianity and became its leaders, and now wanted to blame the actions of their pagan ancestors on the family of their own victim; thus arose the ‘conspiracy theory’ that all Jews of later generations are somehow to blame for the death of Jesus;

·        The Pope is the leader of Rome and the present Pope renounced this Roman conspiracy theory, clearing post-crucifiction generations of Jews from the charge of killing Jesus; Mel Gibson’s father is a conspiracy theorist and believes the Jews and Masons rule over even the Catholic church itself, and installed the Pope as a front, and this to them is the explanation for his traitorous ruling clearing the Jews.

·        Mahatir Mohammed, as president of the organization of Muslim states, claimed (and the billion people he represents believe) that the Jews rule the world by proxy (of course he makes the classic mistake outlined above);

Megillat Esther

Haman and Ahashverosh operated on higher levels than the purely mundane

·        Ahashverosh summons the astrologers (1:13) to ask what to do re Vashti

·        Haman cast lots (as did the sailors who cast Jonah into the sea)

·        Haman (presumably due to his awareness of the historical struggle between Agag/Amalek and the Jews) decided his struggle was against all Jews rather than just Mordechai;

·        Ahashverosh may have felt that his sleep was disturbed because he had not acted properly in some instance and therefore asked to be reads the book of deeds and inquired as to what had been done to reward Mordechai.

Memuchan and Haman

One can see parallels between the reactions of the king’s advisor:

• Haman, regarding Mordechai;
• Memuchan, regarding Vashti:

To the parallel events:

• Vashti’s refusal to come;

·        Mordechai’s refusal to bow.

They both made a rebellion issue out of these events, and the rebellion was not just personal

·        Vashti against the king

·        Mordechai against Haman

Rather, the rebellion of was generalized, involving

·        Women rather than an individual woman,

·        Jews, rather than an individual Jew

And the rebellion threatened the king and the Persian Empire.

In both cases a decree was promulgated throughout the Empire, directed against:

• all women rather than just Vashti,
• all Jews rather than just Mordechai.

Given this similarity of MO, it is not surprising that Tradition considers Memuchan and Haman to be the same person.

……………………………………………………………..

There are two passages: 2:19-20 which seem extra:

1)      Why are we told of the second round of virgin-gathering?

Answer: As preparation for Esther’s comment about not having been summoned by Achashverosh for a long time. Otherwise we are under the impression that he loved Esther so much that surely she could come at will.

2)      We are also told that Esther didn’t reveal her Jewish background; don’t we know this already?

Answer: It’s important because this was after she was chosen to be queen, when we might have thought she would reveal her origin to her husband, the king, and also that as wife and queen she was not anymore bound by her uncle Mordechai’s instructions. And if her background WAS known at this point, it might have resulted in Mordechai’s elevation in status and concomitant exemption from the edict to bow to Haman[41], so we need to be told this here.

HenPecked

Haman (Memuchan) advised that the law of the land place husbands in a superior position to their wives but/because in his household his wife Zeresh was clearly in charge.

Note: Mordechai insisted on not bowing to Haman even after the king’s servants mentioned it over and over 3:3-4.

Mordechai Chooses Confrontation

Note that Mordechai’s non-bowing was not noticed directly by Haman, it was only brought to Haman’s attention by the kings’s servants after Mordechai did not listen to them when they confronted him repeatedly on this issue.

Mel Gibson and Haman: Blaming all the Jews for the actions of one or a few

Mordechai must have claimed exemption from bowing since he was a Jew. Since Mordechai made it into an issue of Judaism rather than him himself, and since the servants realized there was a power confrontation involved, this led Haman to take this seriously, and to decree against all Jews and Judaism rather than just Mordechai.

Intimations of Divine Intervention

Although God is not mentioned, it is clear that when Mordechai admonishes Esther, goading her to intervene with Ahashverosh, he was refering to a divine plan:

·        “maybe this was the reason you became queen”;

·        “if you do NOT act, you and your family will be destroyed”

·        “salvation will come from another quarter”. 

Esther then shows that she recognizes the aspect of divine intervention: she asks that the Jews to fast in order to merit that she not be killed by Ahashverosh.

Intimations of Divinely inspired authorship

(5:6): “Haman thinks in his heart: ‘to whom would the king want to give honor but ME’ ”.

Here we are privy to his thoughts, presumably via divine revelation (although it could be that it was made known later by H himself, or it is just a statement of the almost-obvious).

Jews DO Rule by Proxy!!

There are VERY many parallels between Mordechai and Yosef, and the words and actions in their stories.

Not just the essential fact of a Jew rising to prominence due to his timely intervention/advice but even the details such as being paraded on a horse, and that Esther did not reveal her identity just like Yosef did not reveal his identity to Paraoh. (A full version of this is available).

…

2:22: Mordechai, by being in the King’s courtyard, hears a plot by Bigsan and Seresh and relays message to Ahashverosh via Esther, who tells it to Ahashverosh in Mordechai’s name. Presumably Ahashverosh then is aware of Mordechai and that he stays often near the King’s courtyard.

It’s interesting that H is not aware of all this, or at least isn’t careful to not clash with Mordechai..

Perhaps when H saw that Mordechai was never rewarded for the warning he passed to the king regarding the plot to kill him, he felt secure in plotting against Mordechai.

……

File: “Megillas Esther” Folder: “Chumash stuff” home pc purim 2001

Note: Mordechai insisted on not bowing to Haman even after the king’s servants mentioned it over and over 3:3-4.

Mel Gibson and Haman: Blaming all the Jews for the actions of one or a few

Mordechai must have claimed exemption from bowing since he was a Jew. Since Mordechai made it into an issue of Judaism rather than him himself, and since the servants realized there was a power confrontation involved, this led Haman to take this seriously, and to decree against all Jews and Judaism rather than just Mordechai.

………..

Purim Torah

·        Uvehikavetz btulot shenit: nes purim, betulot for the second time!

·        Ishimo

…………..

Why did M tell Esther not to reveal her identity (like Yosef did not reveal his identity to Paraoh in Egypt)? After all A seemed very liberal to conquered peoples.

3:3,4. M’s non-bowing ws not notice directly by Haman, it was brought to H’s attention by the kings’s servants.

Why did M insist on not bowing, remaining in the courtyard, even after the king’s servants mentioned it over and over?

3:4. M must have claimed exemption from bowing since he was a Jew. This probably led Haman to decree against all Jews, since M made it into an issue.

Why not just hang M right away? At that point if he could get approval for killing a whole nation he could seemingly have gotten the king to approve M’s execution. Why did he have to wait for Zeresh’s advice in this?!

It is funny/ironic that he said that all women should serve their husbands, and yet all his advice came from his wife!

A told Haman himself to get the horse and stuff for M, and himself to lead the procession etc. This must have been a deliberate insult. Why?

It might have seemed better to have A know right away that Haman wanted M to hang, and this would have made him suspicious of H. But it seems he did not know. Or maybe he did, since Charvona said ‘the tree that H ..” and A did not seem surprised that H wanted M killed.

But if A knew why H wanted M killed, then he would realize that the edict was wrong - but probably he did not care, and in any case, the edict was irreversible.

It would have seemed more direct had the horse story happened first, and then Esther would call the king and H to a dinner and make her accusation/request. Instead she had to make a second dinner. What was the purpose in having events happen this way?

Did Esther imply that H knew she was Jewish, and therefore imply that H was trying to kill those most loyal to the king, namely Esther and Mordechai (like memuchan had vashti deposed). But why would A believe that H knew and intended this?

Esther was seen by all who came in contact with her as a good person etc, (Like Yosef who had chen) and so maybe A trusted her instincts.

What is last few words “dover shalom lechol zar’o”? His children? Why should he not!? Maybe means to Esther’s relatives, or his children who criticized re Esther?DO:

…….

The other Jews in the courtyard presumably bowed to H, only Mordechai didn’t, yet H desired to kill ALL Jews, everywhere.

....

Doseyhem eynam osim: ie the Jews kept the Torah: so this was the cause or pretext for slaughter, but also maybe what saved them!

4:16 Esther says she’ll go to the king “shelo kados”: parallel to

Doseyhem eynam osim

5:3 Why did the king offer ‘half the kingdom’ to Esther?

Ans: Since she was putting her life on the line by coming to see him without an invitation.

In Eden: “Hamin ha’etz” = letters of Hamn ha’etz.

Gather all the jews: a precondition, if they are united she’ll do it

Why did Esther invite the king to two wine feasts on consecutive days?

We know that he acted rashly due to his temper when drunk as on the seventh day of festivities when he summoned Vashti and then deposed her (1:12, 2:1), so this was a way to bring him to the same point where he would command to hang Haman, as indeed occurred when he was enraged after drinking wine (7:7, 7:10).

………..

Jews DO Rule by Proxy!!

There are VERY many parallels between Mordechai and Yosef, and the words and actions in their stories.

Not just the essential fact of a Jew rising to prominence due to his timely intervention/advice but even the details such as being paraded on a horse, and that Esther did not reveal her identity just like Yosef did not reveal his identity to Paraoh. (A full version of this is available).

HenPecked

Haman (Memuchan) advised that the law of the land place husbands in a superior position to their wives but/because in his household his wife Zeresh was clearly in charge.

Mordechai Chooses Confrontation

Mordechai insisted on not bowing to Haman; the king’s servants noticed this and mentioned it to him over and over 3:3-4. Note that Mordechai’s non-bowing was not noticed directly by Haman, it was only brought to Haman’s attention by the kings’s servants after Mordechai did not listen to them when they confronted him repeatedly on this issue.

Fickleness

one of these servants later brought about Haman’s hanging.

Q: so many servants knew of M’s relation to Esther (4:4-6), how was it kept secret from H and A?

Did Mordechai tell the Jews that the fast was commanded by Esther, and why? If so, then all the Jews knew she was the queen, and certainly somehow A would have found out.

Like Yosef story:

·        King is perplexed by something, summons his advisors, one suggests what to do (Yosef was just asked for an interp and also offered advice, here A openly asked for advice what to do)

·        Esther is liked by all, helped

Vashti made a celebration for all the women (1:9), and they all must have witnessed Vashti’s refusal to follow A’s will, and so Memuchan says (1:16-18) that V’s rebellion will affect all the sarim, presumably the wives of the sarim were the ones at V’s celebration, and they were from all the Empire, so news of this would travel all over, and affect all women everywhere.

1:21, 2:1-4: Note that after he sobered up he didn’t ask his advisors anymore what to do about the steps taken against Vashti, he asked the ‘na’arei hamelech’! and their advice was ‘pleasing in the eyes of the king’, the same words used for the advice of Memuchan was ‘pleasing in the eyes of the king’.

2:4: “ ‘the girl who is pleasing in the eyes of the king shall rule instead of V’, and this was pleasing in the eyes of the king..”

2:11 M goes to courtyard of Harem every day to keep track of Esther (she is kept there until chosen).

2:19: second round of virgin roundup; M is now sitting at the King’s gate (Esther was taken to King’s house)

…

A(hashverosh) wanted to show off Vashti to ministers - this means that the general feast of seven days for the general public was right after the 6 month one for his ministers of the various countries of his Empire, who stayed for it. But why make it then and not for the ministers alone?

A had good public policy, making a party for his ministers. And, making one for the inahabitant sof his capital, ensuring their appreciation loyalty.

Good policy of consulting advisers “that ws the was things were done”, and of not being aboe to countermnad his own orders. But all this consulting and delegating authority- re killing vashti, re finding a replacement, re killing the jews, saving the jews, killing haman, allowing all the jews to kill their enemies etc,  shows a weakness, vacillating.

Also interesting that V made a separate party for the women - thi sis tzanua!

Pshat is very unclear as to why she refused to come to allow A to show her off, but it could be that she was very tzanua and did not want to be a beauty object - but this is too contemporar, not likely her motive. So why?

Could there have been a translation problem involved - after all there were so many cultures and languages involved. (note that one of the provisions of A’s edict afterwards was that men could speak their language at home, not that of the wife)

Why in pshat is memuchan not stated to be haman?

Memuchan and haman seem experts at generalizing: v’s act is seen as a danger to the realm, and mordechai’s act is seen as a danger, and that all the jews are deserving of death not just M.

 Party was 180 days = 6 months, like the 6 months in shemen hamor etc.

cktov lev hamelekh bayayin: vachamaso bo’aro bo: repeats in a few places: that’s why Estheer made a second party?

Does not mention explicitly what was done to Vashti 2:1. Clearly she was deposed, but does not say if anything was done to her other than that.

Maybe actually Vashti was a princess of one of the conquered countries, and if her act of disobedience would be interpreted as political, it would be even more problematic, especially in front of all the ministers. So the advisers made it into a domestic dispute instead.

Why bother sending out royal edicts all over? Either because this was a symptom of widespread attitude that required widespread attentio , or because it was assumed that everyone would hear the story 2:17,18, and so it ws necessary that a royalk edict precede the rumor.

Why did M tell Esther not to reveal her identity (like Yosef did not reveal his identity to Paraoh in Egypt)? After all A seemed very liberal to conquered peoples.

3:3,4. M’s non-bowing ws not notice directly by Haman, it was brought to H’s attention by the kings’s servants.

Why did M insist on not bowing, remaining in the courtyard, even after the king’s servants mentioned it over and over?

3:4. M must have claimed exemption from bowing since he was a Jew. This probably led Haman to decree against all Jews, since M made it into an issue.

Why not just hang M right away? At that point if he could get approval for killing a whole nation he could seemingly have gotten the king to approve M’s execution. Why did he have to wait for Zeresh’s advice in this?!

It is funny/ironic that he said that all women should serve their husbands, and yet all his advice came from his wife!

A told Haman himself to get the horse and stuff for M, and himself to lead the procession etc. This must have been a deliberate insult. Why?

It might have seemed better to have A know right away that Haman wanted M to hang, and this would have made him suspicious of H. But it seems he did not know. Or maybe he did, since Charvona said ‘the tree that H ..” and A did not seem surprised that H wanted M killed.

But if A knew why H wanted M killed, then he would realize that the edict was wrong - but probably he did not care, and in any case, the edict was irreversible.

It would have seemed more direct had the horse story happened first, and then Esther would call the king and H to a dinner and make her accusation/request. Instead she had to make a second dinner. What was the purpose in having events happen this way?

Did Esther imply that H knew she was Jewish, and therefore imply that H was trying to kill those most loyal to the king, namely Esther and Mordechai (like memuchan had vashti deposed). But why would A believe that H knew and intended this?

Esther was seen by all who came in contact with her as a good person etc, (Like Yosef who had chen) and so maybe A trusted her instincts.

What is last few words “dover shalom lechol zar’o”? His children? Why should he not!? Maybe means to Esther’s relatives, or his children who criticized re Esther?

……………….

Purim Torah

·        Uvehikavetz btulot shenit: nes purim, betulot for the second time!

·        Ishimo

…..

·         "I See" said the Blind Man, & Rachel's Posthumous Children

·         The Biblical "Dolly", Stealing Idols and Angry Words Kill

·         Circumcision, Curses, and Political Expediancy

·         Vayishlach: Were Your Grandparents Childless?

·         Never Look a Gift God in the Mouth: It's DeJa Vu All Over Again

·        God Did not say “Let there be light” Beshalach

·        Its Déjà vu All over again

·        Seeing (What you’re hearing) is believing

·        Beshalacha: Jewish time (chodesh); who are you fooling?

·        Re: Ya’akov Was No Heel Well ! Kissing Cousins Rivka's Shady Family

………