 |
|
|
Surf A Little Torah
PARASHAT BO
God did not punish only Pharaoh and the Egyptians; He "punished" the Egyptian deities, as well: "I will go through the land of Egypt and strike down every firstborn… and I will mete out punishments to all the gods of Egypt" (12:12). Meaning, God physically dismembered the Egyptian statues as He killed the firstborn. Why? Were ten plagues not enough to demonstrate His unlimited power and exclusive claim to the title "God"? Rav Elchanan Wasserman Hy"d is cited as explaining that God's destruction of the idols in fact served a critical purpose within the process of the Exodus. God needed to not only punish Egypt, but also to eradicate the legitimacy of the beliefs that formed the bedrock upon which the country was founded. Egyptian culture was characterized by fundamentally skewed philosophies and ideologies. As God repeats several times throughout the ten plagues, among the primary goals of the Exodus is "and you shall know that I am God." To this end, Egyptian culture had to be crushed along with the Egyptian people. This indeed constitutes one of the great miracles of the Exodus. The destruction of the Egyptian idols signified the public rejection of the pagan beliefs and denial of the existence of the true God. Our redemption, too, will feature this same element. God will teach all humanity that the many ideologies and "ism's" to which people prostrate themselves ultimately fall before the power and ultimate truth of the Almighty Himself. [Prepared by David Silverberg.]
ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION? How long are Bnei Yisrael in Egypt? At the Brit Bein ha-B'tarim, the Covenant Between the Parts, God tells Avraham, "'You shall certainly know that your seed will be strangers in a land which is not theirs, and [the natives] will enslave them and mistreat them for four hundred years'" (Bereishit 15:13). As Rashi there notes, based on Seider Olam, this prophecy does not indicate that Avraham's descendants will spend four centuries in Egypt specifically, but rather "'in a land which is not theirs,'" which includes Kenaan itself, G'rar, and Aram among the places where Yitzchak, Yaakov, and Bnei Yisrael wander and suffer, climaxing in Egyptian slavery. Indeed, we cannot say that Bnei Yisrael are physically in Egypt for a period of four centuries, as Moshe's grandfather Kehat is among those who descend to Egypt with Yaakov (ibid. 46:11), and adding together his years (133; Shemot 6:18), the years of Moshe's father Amram (133; 6:20), and the eighty years which Moshe has reached at the point of the Exodus (7:7), we arrive at only 350 years. Instead, noting that Yaakov was 130 when he came to Egypt (Bereishit 47:9) and that Yitzchak was 60 years old when his sons were born (ibid. 25:26), we find that B'nei Yisrael spend only 210 years of the 400 in the land of Egypt. Yet in this week's parasha, as Bnei Yisrael finally leave Egypt and head into the desert, the Torah declares: "The residence of Bnei Yisrael that they resided in Egypt was thirty years and four hundred years. It was at the end of thirty years and four hundred years—it was in the middle of that day - that all of Lord's hosts left the land of Egypt" (12:40-41). Where do these thirty extra years come from? Since Avraham is 100 when Yitzchak is born (Bereishit 21:5), this verse seems to indicate that the "residence of Bnei Yisrael in Egypt" began when Avraham was 70 - even though, according to the simple meaning of the text (ibid. 12:4), God did not speak to Avraham until our patriarch was 75! What happened five years before that point? There is only one event in Avraham's life that we know of before God speaks to him: at some point, his father Terach gathers his family, abandons Ur, in the land of the Kasdim (later Bavel and still later Iraq), and sets out for Ke'naan, getting as far as Charan. When does this journey begin? The Torah does not tell us, but the Ibn Ezra conjectures that this was five years before God's revelation, when Avraham was 70. We thus understand what begins the count of 430 years: Avraham leaves his birthplace and begins to experience the feeling of being "a stranger in a land which is not [his]." Yet this only begs the question: why does the Torah tell us this fact now? Is it not more important to stress that God is fulfilling Brit Bein ha-B'tarim, redeeming Avraham's descendants with great wealth after four centuries of oppression and suffering? Fittingly, it is the two verses which present the problem that ultimately resolve it. For Bnei Yisrael, v. 40 notes, 430 is the number of years "that they resided in Egypt" - not in the physical "land of Egypt," which the v. 41 notes that they leave on that day, but rather the cultural territory of the Egyptian exile, from which only the giving of the Torah at Sinai can free them. For 430 years, Avraham and his descendants had been subjected to the whims of foreign rulers; the time has come for them to inherit their land, to live in the land of Yisrael as the nation of Yisrael according to the Torah of Yisrael. Even if they someday suffer exile again, they will still know where their home is - and that they owe their true allegiance to no human master, but rather to the King of Kings. This is a difficult lesson to learn, and it is no accident that even after B'nei Yisrael complete the conquest of the Promised Land, they must wait another 430 years until the monarchy is solidified as Shlomo - who makes the Davidic kingship a dynasty and builds the Temple - ascends to the throne. The culture of subjugation is hard to unlearn, and this is the point that the Torah choose to makes as Bnei Yisrael experience their physical Exodus. As Rav J.B. Soloveitchik z.t.l. has put it, it is simple enough to take the Jews out of Egypt, but not to take Egypt out of the Jews. [Prepared by Yoseif Bloch.]
As we all know from the seder, the Haggada emphasizes that the Exodus was performed by the Almighty Himself, not through an agent. The Haggada bases itself on a verse from our parasha: "I will go through the land of Egypt…" "I," not an angel or some other emissary. Why, in fact, did God make a point of involving Himself directly with the killing of the firstborn and the saving of His people? Why could He not have sent an angel, as He did when the time came to destroy Sedom and save Lot and his family? One explanation is cited in the name of Arizal. Although the answer typically involves "Kabbalistic" concepts, we may perhaps uncover some meaning readily understandable to those of us not [yet] versed in the wisdom of the Arizal. The Ar"I suggested that Egypt had become so infused by the powers of impurity, that even an angel would not have left Egypt spiritually intact. God had to go into Egypt "personally," with no intermediary or secondary force, as He was the only "one," as it were, that could successfully withstand the overpowering force of impurity that plagued Egypt. The idea that God Himself redeemed Bnei Yisrael without the involvement of an agent might mean that the Exodus occurred through purely supernatural means. The redemption required the complete suspension of the natural order. God did not utilize the forces of nature to kill the Egyptian firstborn, as He had done to punish Pharaoh and his subjects during the first nine plagues. [According to the "Tosefet Berakha," the plague of darkness was actually the development of cataracts in the eyes of all the Egyptians!!] On this night God operated directly, without the "agents" of the natural world. Why? Because, as the Ar"I explains, any natural force would have become "defiled" in Egypt! The "impurity" of Egypt refers to its failure to recognize God as the force behind all that transpires in the universe. The Midrashim speak at length of the nation's arrogance and sense of self-sufficiency. For example, one Midrash tells us that Pharaoh thought himself to be divine. Another Midrash speaks of how the Egyptians worshipped the Nil, while yet another tells of their worship of sheep. In other words, they prostrated themselves before their own sources of power, agricultural success and wealth. As the richest and most developed culture in the ancient world, Egypt felt no need for a God; they took care of themselves. This denial of divine strength comprised the "impurity" of Egypt. Were Egypt to have been defeated by an indirect manifestation of divine power, then one of the central goals of the Exodus - that the Egyptians "know that I am God" - would never have been achieved. The Egyptians would still not have recognized the power and ultimate authority of the Almighty. God's "angels," i.e. the forces of nature, would have been defiled in Egypt - they would have been dissociated from their divine origin and perceived as coincidental acts of nature. Therefore, God had to reveal His might directly. Only an overtly supernatural display of divine force could "withstand the impurity of Egypt," would demonstrate to the Egyptians once and for all that "Hashem is God; there is none besides Him." [Prepared by David Silverberg] At the beginning of the Parsha, we read that when Moshe and Aharon present God's demand, yet again, to free His people in order to serve Him – that Pharaoh, upon the advice of his courtiers (under the influence of the threat of the locust plague) agrees to release the Israelites in order that they may serve their God. However, his terms involve a limited release of only the adult males. Moshe, however, has already laid down the terms that will avoid the plague: (Shemot 10,1) "With our youths and will our elders we will go; with our sons and with our daughters, with our flocks and will our herds we will go – for it is God's festival that we have." What can be learned from the detail that Moshe declares – our youths and elders, sons and daughters, flocks and herds? Why is the underlying necessity for all these to be released explained as "for it is God's festival that we have?" R. Elimelech of Lizensk brings his attention to this matter in his wok "Noam Elimelech." Firstly, he explains the phrase "Bi-niureinu u-zikneinu nelekh" ("with our youths and with our elders we will go") by way of reference to the Talmud's recorded events at the Simchat Beit Ha-shoeva in the Temple: "They would say: Happy is our youth that did not shame our aged-ness", which was understood as that in result of their behaving as they should in their youth, they did not need to be ashamed when old, of their youthful acts since they were completely congruent with their lifestyles as mature, respected, elders. Such is not the case however with those who did not act with holiness as youths, who would be ashamed as older people of those acts. Since in such a case, a person must anyhow change his ways, it would be a good thing to make himself holy right away – at the earliest possible opportunity. This, he notes, would be a fitting understanding of what is written in Mishlei (22:5) "Educate the youth in his own way [so that] also when he grows old he will not diverge from it." The reason he will not diverge from it is that he won't need to change from his earlier ways, rather, he can continue the ways of his youth and with ease serve God. Thus R. Elimelech explains: "with our youths and with our elders we will go" - is to infer that with regard to our behavior we will go in holiness – both in our youth and with aged. "With our sons and daughters we will go" - is that we will guide them in the paths of holiness. "With our flocks and with our herds we will go " – alludes to matters of the physical, material reality such as our business dealings and the way that we eat and drink, we will walk in the path of God. Why will we do all this? "Because it is a festival of God for us." This is that the flame of a glorious fire burns within us to serve God. This in essence is Moshe's message to Pharaoh then. Our nation does not concern itself with the mere discharging of religious duty, with sending our the adult males to perform some religious ceremony and then return to life as normal. Rather, the Jewish nation is one cohesive unit that walks in holiness. Our young and our old – in our youth as well as when aged – go together to educate themselves and all who are in their circle in holiness. This holiness towards which our nation constantly strives, is to be found not only in our religious ceremonies, but in every facet of day to day life. For our entire lives, encompassing everything we do "is a festival of God for us." [Prepared by Reuven Lavi.]
Upon first glance at the parshiot of Shemot through Bo it seems that there are many detached moments of speech between God and Moshe. There are three main encounters: the burning bush, God's response to Moshe's complaint at the beginning of Vaera, and the beginning of Chapter 12. Then there are several verses peppering Vaera and Bo that would seem to constitute other conversations. What are these for, are they not repetitions of the longer dialogues? It seems that if we view these not as discussions but rather as indicators in the story, not only will these be less problematic but we will have a better understanding of the Exodus. At the burning bush God reveals His plan to Moshe: to save the people and bring them to the Promised Land, and to punish Pharoah. Moshe, however, in his return to God, isn't concerned with punishing the Egyptians, just with the salvation of the people. Accordingly, at the end of Shemot and beginning of Vaera, God reviews his plan: in 6:1 He repeats that He will punish Pharoah and 6:2-8 is the repetition of the promise of salvation. God originally intended to have the two messages send and understood as one but now it was clear that the two messages would be implemented separately. The next section, which opens with a "bookend" of a divine conversation, deals with the punishment of Pharoah and Egypt. Starting from Chapter 7:1 - 11:8, we read solely of the plagues and the destruction of Egypt. Then from 12:1 we read of a wholly new story - the redemption of the people. Here we find that Moshe, for the first time since before the plagues, talks to the people, instructing them as to how they would play a role in their salvation. We are left with verses 11:9-10 that again appear to be a superfluous discussion between God and Moshe. If we take the approach that they are indicators, we can see that this is the conclusion of the Pharoah/Egypt section. The section concludes that Pharoah did NOT free the people (even after the first nine plagues). This is indeed what God had said would happen. Now we must turn to God's relationship with the people. Freedom would not be attained through mere punishment of Pharoah - it was now time for the people to take an active role and thereby discover their relationship with God, their very real savior. In summation, we may conclude that God and Moshe spoke fewer times than a cursory glance would suggest. They talked at the bush, at the end of Shemot/beginning of Vaera, and at the beginning of Chapter 12 (not including the command of each plague). These reflect God's original plan (one act including two goals) and the final plan of two distinct actions - punishment and salvation. Now we can see how the shorter conversations are indeed indicators of the general structure, not conversations on their own. [Prepared by Aytan Kadden.] "'At this time tomorrow, I will bring a very heavy hail. Never before in Egypt, since the day it was founded, has there been anything like it. Now send word and make arrangements to shelter your livestock and everything else you have in the field. Any man or beast which remains in the field, and does not come indoors, will be pelted by the hail and will die.' Some of Pharaoh's subjects feared God's word, and they made their slaves and livestock flee indoors. But those who did not fear God's word left their slaves and livestock and in the field." (Shmot 9:18-21) Six plagues have come and gone. Now, at the end of Parashat Vaera, Moshe predicts a seventh plague. But this time, Moshe adds some advice. The will destroy crops but if the Egyptians act, they can save their slaves and livestock. As we see, many Egyptians ignore the warning, even though Moshe has already correctly predicted six plagues. What is the purpose of Moshe's warning? If the plagues are for punishment, why help the Egyptians not to get punished? In addition, after all the plagues, how can the Egyptians ignore the warning? A famous question on the plagues is that if the whole point was to take us out of Egypt, why didn't God just put the Egyptians to sleep for a few days so we could escape? I would add, if it was necessary to punish Egypt, God could just kill them all at the same time or at least send all ten plagues at once. There must be other aims to the plagues. One of them is educational. The Jews needed to be prepared to enter into a covenant with God, receiving the Torah. Not only that, the Egyptians also were to be educated. Torah is not just a secret for the Jewish people. Torah is supposed to eventually bring the whole world to know God. Torah is valid because it is a direct prophecy from God to Moshe. Hence, the nations have to know that Moshe was indeed a prophet. They also need to know that his prophecy has consequences for how they are supposed to live their lives. The warning, then, was to give the Egyptians a chance to learn a principle. Moshe's prophecy is true and effects what actions people should perform. The resistance of the Egyptians to Moshe's warning shows how challenging this concept was to the Egyptian world-view. All Egyptians, though, learned that there is a price to pay for ignoring Moshe's prophecy. It may seem an obvious lesson, but we can all learn from it. [Prepared by Samuel Jackman.] "Moses summoned the elders of Israel, and said to them, 'Gather the people and get yourselves sheep for your families, so that you will be able to slaughter the Passover sacrifice. You will then have to take a bunch of hyssop and dip it into the blood that will be placed in a basin. Touch the beam over the door and the two door posts with some of the blood in the basin…God will then pass through to strike Egypt. When he sees the blood over the door and on the two door posts, God will pass over that door and not let the force of destruction enter your houses to strike.'" (Shemot 12:21-23) As God readies the tenth and final plague, the Jews are for the first time given an active role. If they want their first-born to be saved, they must slaughter the Passover sacrifice and put the blood on the doorframes. What could be the function of this sacrifice? We could explain that it is educational. We're leaving Egypt to serve God, so we must learn to obey His commands. Perhaps it is to wean us from a slave mentality. Only free men would take initiative to get themselves a sheep and sacrifice it. This would make sense if not for one flaw: those who did not sacrifice had their first –born killed in the plague. If it was only educational, there would be not death penalty. Why, then, did we deserve death for failing to sacrifice a Passover lamb? From the text, it seems clear that this is a punishment for Egypt. We have become a part of Egyptian society. From a small family in Goshen, far from mainstream society, we now have Egyptian neighbors, even Egyptians sharing our houses with us. This Egyptian society is cruel and idolatrous. Sheep are worshipped as gods. To disassociate ourselves form this society, we need to show that we do not worship sheep. Rather, we worship God. We slaughter a sheep as a sacrifice to God. If we do not, we are a part of Egyptian society and must suffer with it. What was the sin of this society? Enslaving the Jews? If so, how could enslaved Jews be punished? Rather, it was a society which worshipped idols and denied God. Idolatry led to paganism, to a society without morality. If the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob could fall as low as their neighbors, they should be punished too. They had to show that they had not. On a deeper level, they had to atone for being part of such a society, even if they were not like it, even if it had not polluted them. The sacrifice of Passover is parallel in its laws to that of a sotah. A sotah is a married woman who has been locked in a room with another man. There is something wrong with that , even if nothing happened. There was something wrong with being in Egypt, even if you did not succumb to its ideology. Perhaps that is why our ancestors had to sacrifice a lamb in Egypt. [Prepared by Samuel Jackman.]
This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism - 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds. Make Jewish learning partof your week on a regular basis - enroll in the (c) YeshivHar Etzion1997 All rights reserved to Yeshivat Har Etzion Yeshivat Har Et | ||||||||||