Exodus · Chapter 13

And Hashem spoke with Moses, saying:

"And He spoke" — Scripture takes a brief form, since Moses stands in place of all Israel. Yefet said that the command was upon Moses to sanctify them verbally — the inverse of "the priest shall declare him impure" (Lev. 13:5), for the priest is holy and does not render something impure himself, but only through speech, by pronouncing with his mouth that it is impure.

וידבר ה' אל משה לאמור, “G’d spoke to Moses for him to communicate.” According to the plain meaning of the text the word לאמור means that Moses was to relay the instructions received from G’d to the people. Alternatively, the word could mean that in addition to what the Torah has spelled out clearly for all to read and understand there are hidden meanings to be deciphered by those who apply themselves to Torah-study in depth. The נגלה, the revealed part, are the details of the commandment. The נסתר, the mystical, hidden aspect of this portion, is that which not everybody can grasp even if he tries. There have always been aspects of Torah not accessible to the average person. This is what David said (Psalms 62,12) “G’d has said one thing; yet I have heard two.” A single communication may contain more than one message. Solomon echoed the same sentiment when he said: “a word spoken properly is like golden apples set in silver” (Proverbs 25,11). In this verse Solomon compared the matters which are revealed to silver, whereas matters concealed he likened to gold, i.e. they had first been overlaid, made invisible by silver. The meaning of our verse as well as most verses which commence in a similar form is: G’d told Moses the commandment and implied that he should tell the Israelites about it. In addition, לאמור, he told Moses to reveal to the people the more profound aspects of the commandment, aspects which do not meet the eye of the reader. Nachmanides writes in his commentary on Exodus 6,10 (where the verse commences in the same manner as here) “the word אמירה refers to a complete utterance, meaning that an אמירה נראית, ‘a superficial utterance’” is not sufficient. [Nachmanides tries to justify why sometimes G’d added “say to the Children of Israel,” whereas other times He contents Himself with the word לאמור alone. Ed] Seeing that the quality of G’d’s communications to Moses was so superior and clearer than His communications to lesser prophets, G’d was able to say to Moses: “make the matter clear to your listeners the Jewish people.” Other prophets (Numbers 12,8) with whom G’d Himself spoke in riddles were not able to clarify matters to the people in the degree Moses was able to clarify it for them. A Kabbalistic approach: The words וידבר ה' אל משה reflect the inner force, the concealed force, the word לאמור is a reference to the fact that this force had become manifest by means of the Shechinah. This is the meaning of the words in Exodus 24,12 אשר כתבתי להורותם, “which I wrote to teach them.” The word להורתם is written defective, without the letter ו which should be part of the plural ending, thus making it similar to Song of Songs 3,4 ואל חדר הורתי, “into the bedroom of my parents.” This is merely a euphemism for the acquisition of information reserved for the intimates of G’d. You are aware already that the expression דבור is a deeper form of communication than אמירה. Whereas אמירה describes the oral Torah, דבור describes the written Torah [with its multifaceted ways of interpretations. Ed.] The experts of Kabbalah were thoroughly familiar with this. This is what prompted Eicha Rabbah to translate the words בצע אמרתו In Lamentations 2,17 as בזע פרפורין שלו, “He tore His purple curtain (allowed the Temple curtain to be destroyed).” [The standard translation of the words is: “He carried out His decree.” Ed.] We have to ask ourselves what made the author of this Midrash translate these words in this fashion? The word אמרא, as cloak, i.e. or better “a fringed garment,” is well known. In this instance the word פרפורין may be understood as a euphemism for the edge of such a cloak. Our sages understood the verse in Lamentations as explaining the reason why the Temple was destroyed. First the Jews had despised the תורת ה' צבאות (Isaiah 5,24). This was a reference to the written Torah. Then (same verse) ואת קדוש ישראל נאצו, “and the Holy One of Israel they spurned.” This is a reference to the oral Torah. To get back to our verse here. The word ויאמר or לאמור is derived from אמרא, the edge of a cloak a person wears on his left side. We have a verse in Samuel I 28,14 illustrating this: “he is wrapped in a cloak.” We also have a verse symbolically depicting G’d Himself as wrapped in such a cloak, i.e. עוטה אור כשלמה, “He wraps light around Himself as a man would wrap a cloak around himself” (Psalms 104,2). The cloak referred to in that verse is the attribute of Justice. On the other hand, the word דבור, and therefore וידבר, when employed by the Torah is derived from the word דבורה, the bee, which though providing honey, i.e. sweetness, also harbors a deadly sting. The bee therefore symbolizes an attribute of G’d which combines both the attribute of Mercy and the attribute of Justice. The oral Torah is emanated from that attribute, seeing it is a derivative of the written Torah and the written Torah itself is based on the combination of the attribute of Justice and the attribute of Mercy.

"Sanctify before Me every firstborn that opens every womb among the children of Israel, of man and of beast — it belongs to Me."

פטר כל רחם THE FIRST OFFSPRING OF EVERY WOMB — The words mean: that which first openeth the womb, the root פטר meaning to open, as in (Proverbs 17:14) “As one makes an opening (פוטר) for water so is the beginning of strife”; and so, too, is (Psalms 22:8) יפטירו בשפה i. e. “they open the lips”. לי הוא IT IS MINE — I have acquired him for Myself through My having smitten the first born of the Egyptians.

SANCTIFY UNTO ME. This means that they are to consecrate the firstborn at once so that the commandment be applicable in the wilderness. This chapter adds many commandments: that they remember the day [when they left Egypt] and that the month was Aviv, and that they keep this ordinance in its season. This is an allusion to the intercalation [of an extra month] in the lunar year, since we are to observe the Passover only in the month of Aviv, [which is the spring]. On the subject of leavened bread, this chapter adds: Neither shall there be leaven seen with thee, in all thy borders. At the conclusion, it adds the commandment of the frontlets.

"Peter" — means an opening, like "piturei tzitzim" (carved open-flowers, 1 Kings 6:18). The meaning is: the son who first opened the womb. The word "rechem" (womb) is unusual, for the rule in the Holy Tongue is that a letter preceding a guttural letter takes a patach (open vowel).

קדש לי כל בכור, they all have to be redeemed just as other sanctified items which cannot be used for their designated purpose can be redeemed; otherwise they are forbidden for secular use. This prohibition is spelled out in Deuteronomy 15,19 in the words לא תעבוד בבכור שורך, “you are not allowed to perform work with your firstborn ox.” The amount designated here by the Torah for redeeming a human being is the minimum applicable mentioned in connection with this legislation in chapter 27 in Leviticus. Whereas a fully mature male over 20 is valued at 50 shekel, the 30 day old infant is valued at 5 shekel.

כל בכור, “every firstborn;” this refers to the firstborn human male; in earlier times sacrificial rituals were performed exclusively by such firstborn males. באדם ובבהמה, “of man or domesticated beast;” this comparison of the firstborn human being to the firstborn domestic animal, means that just as a firstborn human being belongs to the priest, so a firstborn domestic animal belongs to the priest, G-d’s representative on earth. Just as the redemption of a firstborn human being takes place on the thirty first day of his life, so the firstborn domestic beast has to be given to the priest on the thirty first day of its life. (Mechilta Pisscha 16)

קדש לי כל בכור פטר כל רחם, “sanctify for Me every firstborn, the first issue of every womb.” The wording we would have expected here is קדש לי כל בכור בבני ישראל באדם ובבהמה, “sanctify for Me every Jewish firstborn amongst humans and domestic beast,” seeing this would be the logical way of thanking G’d for sparing the firstborn Jews and their livestock. After all, the Egyptian firstborn killed included firstborn of father and mother. Why then does the Torah restrict this legislation to the first issue of a womb, i.e. the firstborn of the mother? In fact, in Egypt not only biological firstborns were smitten but, in the absence of an actual firstborn, the oldest in the house. Why else would there not have been a single house without a dead body on that night? The reason the Torah did not command sanctification of the firstborn of the father is simply that there always exists some slight degree of doubt about the paternity of a child whereas no such doubt exists concerning its maternity. The same rule applies to the firstborn of the livestock as we read in verse 12: “you shall set apart every first issue of the womb to G’d and of every first issue that is dropped by the livestock that belong to you, the males to Hashem.” As a result of this legislation we find that Isaiah 49,15 draws a comparison between G’d’s love for Israel to a father’s love for his son when he said: “can a woman forget her baby or disown the child in her womb?” The prophet suggests that it is impossible for a mother not to have pity on her child. He did not say: “can a father forget his son?” My teacher Rabbi Shlomoh (Rashba) of blessed memory commented that this verse in Isaiah wants to teach us two things. 1) Contrary to the doubt about paternity we mentioned earlier, there is no doubt about G’d considering Himself the father of the Jewish people [Hoseah 2,1 describing the Jewish people as the children of the living G’d. Ed.] seeing the prophet continues “even if the mother might forget her child G’d would never forget Israel.” This thought is confirmed by Eytan in Psalms 89, 27-28 “You are my Father, my G’d, the Rock of my deliverance;” (G’d responds) “I too will appoint him first-born.” 2) just as it is impossible for a mother to exchange her son for another so it is impossible for G’d to exchange the Jewish nation for another. The prophet (G’d) promised: “also these will not be forgotten.” Whereas G’d may “forget” the sin of the golden calf which the Israelites had addressed as “these are your gods O Israel” (Exodus 32,4), G’d will nonetheless not forget the Jewish people as His own as He would not forget their attitude at Mount Sinai when He had introduced Himself to the Jewish people with the words: “I am the Lord your G’d” (20,2). Our sages in the Midrash (Shemot Rabbah 18,3) confirmed this sentiment when they stated that the plague of the killing of the firstborn in Egypt included the females from the palace of Pharaoh with the exception of Pharaoh’s firstborn daughter Batya, the one who had saved Moses at the time. Moses himself had acted as her counsel of defense at the heavenly court. This is one of the meanings of: “she saw him that he was good” (Exodus 2,2). Solomon (Proverbs 31,18) said concerning this Batya that what made her “good” was ”she sees her business thrive, her light never goes out at night.” The “light” of which Solomon spoke was Batya’s soul, and the “night” was the night during which G’d smote the firstborn.

קדש לי כל בכור, “sanctify for Me every firstborn, etc.” In practice these animals (as well as the males of the people) were to be treated as special immediately the Israelites reached the desert. Ibn Ezra, commenting on the singular mode קדש לי, instead of קדשו לי, says that in the interest of brevity Moses is here presented as if he embodied all the people. Some sages believe that the commandment for Moses to “sanctify” is equivalent to “to purify,” The firstborns, at this stage, represent the priests, until after the sin of the golden calf, when they were replaced by the Levites and the direct descendants of Aaron. At any rate, the major function of the priests is to purify the people, the opposite of “defiling them.” Unless the priest is instructed by the Torah to defile himself, such as burying his next of kin, he is to refrain from contact with anything that confers ritual impurity.

פטר, a word describing an opening, an orifice. The word occurs in this sense in Proverbs 17,14 פוטר מים ראשית מדון, “starting a quarrel is like opening a sluice..” באדם, originally, all sacrificial service was performed by the firstborn.

And Moses said to the people: "Remember this day on which you went out from Egypt, from the house of bondage, for with a mighty hand Hashem brought you out from here, and no leavened bread shall be eaten.

זכור את היום הזה REMEMBER THIS DAY — This teaches that one must make mention of the Exodus from Egypt every day (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi on Deuteronomy 27:9).

"And Moses said" — on the fifteenth day he said "remember," as it says, "And this day shall be a memorial for you" (above, 12:14). The meaning of "from the house of slaves" is that the Egyptians put them to work as though they were their own slaves. Elsewhere it says "the iron furnace" (Deut. 4:20), for the Egyptians dominated them with force; yet Hashem brought them out by a mighty hand from those who were mighty over them.

כי בחוזק יד הוציא ה' אתכם מזה ולא יאכל חמץ, “for with a strong hand G’d removed you from this (place) and therefore chametz may not be eaten.” What does the eating of חמץ have to do with the “strong hand” which G’d employed at the time of the Exodus? The verse simply wants to tell us that חמץ is a symbol of the attribute of Justice. Seeing that it was necessary for Israel to invoke G’d’s attribute of Justice against the Egyptians in order for themt to be redeemed, G’d forbade them the consumption of חמץ at the time when we commemorate the Exodus so that we would steer clear of putting our faith in the attribute of Justice as an attribute which acts on its own. Were we to do this we would be guilty of heresy. It would have been easy to conclude that G’d invoked only the attribute of Justice as both He and His heavenly tribunal co-operated in the downfall of the Egyptians. Compare Rashi (based on ancient manuscript of Tanchuma Bo 17). This is also why when G’d created the world the Torah first writes: “at the beginning G’d created heaven and earth” (Genesis 1,1), whereas later (Genesis 2,4) the Torah speaks of: “on the day the Lord G’d made earth and heaven.” [The second formulation includes G’d’s heavenly tribunal. Ed.] This is also the deeper meaning of Isaiah 48,13: “also My hand founded earth, and My right hand spread out the skies.” G’d’s “hand” and G’d’s “right hand” are mentioned separately. Also the word אף is an indication that some other force cooperated with G’d at a certain stage after the beginning. It indicates that not only the “hand” was involved in the creation. It was therefore necessary at this juncture for the Torah to tell us that also ה' was involved in the Exodus, not only the יד, i.e. the attribute of Justice. To remind us of this for all future time, the consumption of חמץ is forbidden on these seven days on which we commemorate the Exodus and the fact that it involved the downfall of our oppressors. This is the mystical dimension of the prohibition of eating חמץ. This explains why the Torah reserves the karet penalty for anyone who deliberately violates this commandment. Eating חמץ on Passover is equivalent to a serious act of heresy, denial of Jewish history; as such the person who does so has read himself out of his people, so to speak. This is why G’d removes him from the Jewish people at death, (12,15) i.e. in compliance with the sinner’s wishes זכור את היום הזה, “to remember this day.” Remembering the day we came out of Egypt is a positive commandment which is applicable daily all year round (hence the infinitive). Our sages (Berachot 12) say that the words “in order that you may remember the day you left Egypt כל ימי חייך, as long as you live,” are a reference to the nights, hence the word כל,”the entire.” This is why we recite the portion dealing with ציצית which is a commandment not applicable at night, in our nightly recital of the קריאת שמע. The last verse in that paragraph speaks of the Exodus and the need to remember it. The words כל ימי are therefore best translated as “the whole days, etc.” instead of as “all the days, etc.” Our sages elaborate (folio 21) further that after the קריאת שמע at night we are to recite the paragraph commencing with the words אמת ואמונה, “true and trustworthy,” whereas in the morning the parallel paragraph commences with the words אמת ויציב, “true and firm.” In order to remember the Exodus by day and by night we must relate to these two aspects of it., i.e. to the attribute of Justice as well as to the attribute of Mercy, both of whom were invoked to orchestrate the Exodus/redemption. The words חוזק יד refer to the attribute of Justice, whereas the words הוציא ה' refer to the attribute of Mercy. When Moses prayed after the sin of the golden calf (Exodus 32,11), he referred to both of these attributes when he said אשר הוצאת מארץ מצרים בכח גדול וביד החזקה,“whom You took out of the land of Egypt with great force and a strong hand.” The point Moses made was that G’d had not only invoked “the strong hand”, i.e. Justice,” but also ”great force,” i.e. the attribute of Mercy.

This day you are going out, in the month of Aviv.

בחדש האביב IN THE MONTH ABIB — But would we not know in which month they went out (even though it were not stated here)? But Moses spake to them as follows: See the kindness which God has bestowed on you — that He brought you forth in a month that is fitted for going out, not hot, nor cold nor rainy. In the same sense it says (Psalms 68:7) “He bringeth forth the prisoners בכשרות” i. e. in a month that is fitted (כשר) for going out (Mekhilta).

"This day" — he first stated that no chametz shall be eaten, and thus you shall do for all generations: as you did on the day you went out, and as this occurred in the season when the aviv is found, so you shall do every year at the time the aviv is found in the Land of Israel — that is the aviv of barley. The meaning of "aviv" is like "first-fruit" (bikkur), for it derives from the root av (father), meaning one who is first among those he has sired, or a master in relation to the student he has taught. It is written: "for the barley was aviv" (above, 9:31). The proof is that it says regarding the Festival of Weeks, "first-fruits of the wheat harvest" (below, 34:22).

בחודש האביב, the reason that the Passover festival is to be observed in spring is so that it will coincide with the legislation of marking the lunar new year with the month of spring, the month of rejuvenation. Our sages have been very careful when calculating a permanent calendar to ensure that Passover never occurs before the spring equinox.

היום אתם יוצאים; this is an exclamation equivalent to: “remember that you are leaving Egypt in the month of spring” (nature’s renewal)

בחודש האביב, “in the month of spring.” The Torah deetrmined here that the festival of Passover must always occur in the spring, i.e. the time of the barley harvest [in those parts of the world. Ed.]; the stalk of the barley is known as אביב, derived from the word אב, “father.” It is so called as it “begets” the kernels of grain we calll wheat. It is well known that all the festivals mentioned in the Torah are related to certain seasons. Shavuot, Pentecost, is to occur during the season when wheat is harvested as the Torah writes: “and the festival of cutting when you reap the first of your labors” (Exodus 23,16). Tabernacles is to occur as a harvest festival, “the time of ingathering,” i.e. at the end of the summer. This is also the reason the sages decreed that when concluding the benediction dealing with the respective pilgrimage festivals we sign with the words: “Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons.” We might have expected the formula to be “Who sanctifies Israel and the festivals,” paraphrasing the wording in the Torah where these festivals are all called מועדי ה' “the festivals of the Lord.” The reason the sages changed the formula was to remind us that the dates of these festivals are all dependent on certain seasons. Another reason we call the month of Nissan “spring” is because spring is the “father” of the 12 months in the calendar. It is also dominated by the zodiac sign of the ram, the “father” of all the twelve zodiac signs. According to Mechilta (Pisscha 16) the month of spring is the one in which מוציא אסירים בכושרות, “G’d releases prisoners when they are in chains.” (Psalms 68,7) The word בכושרות may be understood as “in a suitable (כשר) month.” Rabbi Yochanan understands the word as a combination of בכי ושירות, “weeping and songs of jubilation.” On the one hand, there was not a single Egyptian house in which there was not at least one dead, causing weeping, whereas on the other hand, the Israelites broke out in joyful song as described in Psalms 118,15 קול רנה וישועה באהלי צדיקים, “the tents of the righteous resound with the joyous shouts of deliverance.”

היום אתם יוצאים, “this is the day on which you are leaving.” The reason why the Torah had introduced the prohibition of eating leavened food is as a hint for all future generations that the anniversary of the Exodus is to be a day when anything leavened is out of bounds to the Jewish people. Seeing that on the original date of the Exodus it was springtime, the Torah adds that we must make sure that Passover will always occur in the spring season, [not before the spring equinox. Ed.] The Hebrew word אביב for spring is rooted in the term אב, the first, the leader; the barley from which the first בכורים, one omer of it is offered on the second day of Passover, is always the first ripe grain during the spring in locations such as the land of Israel, or countries even closer to the equator.

האביב; the time when the earliest harvests ripen. Compare the use of the word אביב in this context in Job 8,12 עודנו באבו לא יקטף, “while still tender not yet plucked.” The word also occurs in Song of Songs 6,11 in this sense לראות באבי הנחל, “to see the budding of the vale.’ The dagesh in the letter ב in the word באבי replaces the missing letter ב from the word אביב.

And it shall be, when Hashem brings you into the land of the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Amorites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, which He swore to your fathers to give you — a land producing milk and honey — you shall perform this service in this month.

אל ארץ הכנעני וגו׳ TO THE LAND OF THE CANAANITE — And although it enumerates here only the five peoples, all the seven nations are implied (Mekhilta) for all are included in the generic term Canaanite, although there was one of the races of Canaan which had no other name than that of Canaanite (whilst the other races had, beside the generic name Canaanite, some special designation as Hittite etc.: hence under the term Canaanite one may understand either the one race bearing this name or any of the other races. Here, therefore, the introductory word הכנעני alludes to the particular tribe so called and to the two others included in this generic term, or it may allude to three tribes included in the generic term. In either case we get the “seven peoples of Canaan”). נשבע לאבתיך WHICH HE SWORE UNTO THY FATHERS — In the case of Abraham it says, (Genesis 15:18) “On that day the Lord made a covenant with Abram [saying, To thy seed I will give this land]”; in the case of Isaac it says, (Genesis 26:3) “Sojourn in this land … [for to thee and to thy seed I will give all these countries]”; and in the case of Jacob it says, (Genesis 28:13) “the land wheron thou liest [to thee will I give it and to thy seed]” (Mekhilta). זבת חלב ודבש FLOWING WITH MILK AND HONEY — milk flows from the goats and honey flows from the dates and from the figs. את העבודה הזאת THIS SERVICE — that of the Paschal offering. But has it not already been said above, (Exodus 12:25) “And it shall come to pass when ye be come into the land … [that ye shall keep this service]”? Why then does it repeat it again? On account of a new matter that is introduced here; viz., in the former chapter it says, (v. 26) “And it shall come to pass when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service?” and there Scripture is speaking about a wicked son who excludes himself from the Israelite community (by saying ye, as though he does not wish to participate in the service), whilst here it states, (v. 8) “And thou shalt tell thy son”, referring to a son who does not know how to enquire, and Scripture teaches you that you yourself must open up the conversation with Agadic explanations which attract the heart (cf. Mekhilta; Shabbat 87a).

AND IT SHALL BE WHEN THE ETERNAL SHALL BRING THEE INTO THE LAND OF THE CANAANITE, AND THE HITTITE, AND THE AMORITE, AND THE HIVITE, AND THE JEBUSITE. “Although it enumerates here only five peoples, all of the seven nations are implied. They are all included in [the generic term] Canaanite although there was one of the races which had no name other than that of Canaanite.” Thus the language of Rashi. It is true that they are all included in [the generic term] Canaanite, for they were all his sons. Therefore when Scripture says, And it shall be when the Eternal shall bring thee into the land of the Canaanite, it alludes to all of the seven nations, and thus everywhere does Scripture make use of the term, “the land of Canaan.” But here, [according to Rashi’s interpretation], there is no reason why Scripture should mention most of them and yet leave some of them included in the term Canaanite!In the opinion of our Rabbis, the land of these five nations mentioned here was a land flowing with milk and honey, but not so the land of the remaining two nations [omitted here]. Therefore He gladdened them only with this land [of the five nations]. Thus the Rabbis taught in the Sifre with respect to first-fruits: “And He hath given us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey. Just as the land flowing with milk and honey mentioned elsewhere, [i.e., in the verse before us], refers to the land of the five nations, so also the land flowing with milk and honey mentioned here [in the case of the first-fruits] means the land of the five nations. Rabbi Yosei says that first-fruits are not brought from beyond the Jordan since it is not a land flowing with milk and honey.” Thus the land of the two nations, [the Perizzite and the Girgashite], were excluded from the law of first-fruits because theirs is not a land flowing with milk and honey, and for the same reason, Rabbi Yosei also excluded the land beyond the Jordan, which belonged to the Amorite. And the Amorite mentioned here [among the five nations whose land was flowing with milk and honey], is the Amorite who lived in the Land of Israel proper. A text similar [to the one in the Sifre] is found in the Mechilta on this chapter. It is further taught in the Sifre: “And they, [i.e., all the tribe of Levi], shall have no inheritance — this refers to the inheritance of the five nations; Among their brethren — this refers to the inheritance of the two nations.” The Rabbis [of the Sifre] thus separated these five nations as different, because theirs was the main land which He promised them, for that was the land flowing with milk and honey. And Rashi, in the section of Shoftim V’shotrim, experienced difficulty in explaining this Beraitha. Now according to this opinion [that only the land of the five nations mentioned here was flowing with milk and honey], Scripture stated above, [And I am come down to deliver them… and to bring them up] unto a good and large Land, unto a Land flowing with milk and honey, [and then...

"And it shall be" — he did not enumerate all seven nations, since he had already mentioned this elsewhere.

והיה בי יביאך ה׳ אל ארע הכנעני, "It will be when G'd brings you to the land of the Canaanite, etc." The reason that this particular commandment is conditional on arrival in the Holy Land is either in accordance with what I have written on Exodus 12,25, or in order that the story of the Exodus should not be forgotten once the Israelites had lived in the Holy Land for many generations.

והיה כי יביאך, “it will be when Hashem will bring you, etc.” the Torah repeats that the prohibition to eat leavened products on Passover will remain in force also when the people are settled in their own country.

והיה כי יביאך ה', “It will be when the Lord brings you, etc.” This is already the commencement of the next paragraph which starts in verse 11. The first time the word יביאך is spelled plene, with the letter י in the middle; the second time, (verse 11) that letter י is missing. The first arrival in the land of Israel took place under the leadership of Joshua who fought ten wars (battles) before taking full possession. They were: Jericho, Ai, Giveon, Makkedah, Libnah, Lachish, Eglonah, Chevronah, Dvirah, Mey Marom. (they appear in Joshua 6,20; 8,24; 10,8; 10,28; 10,29; 10,31; 10,34; 10,38; 11,1) The letter י then is an allusion to these “ten=י wars.” אשר נשבע לאבותיך, “which He had promised to your forefathers on oath.” The oath had been given to the patriarchs as the prophet said in Micah 7,20: “which You have sworn to our forefathers in days of yore.” The second time reference is made to the Holy Land, the word יבאך is spelled defectively, with the letter י in the centre missing. This is an allusion to Israel being gathered in from exile when no wars of conquest will be needed for them to resettle in the land. The repeated mention of G’d’s oath in that verse is also a reminder that the wonderful predictions and words of comfort by our prophets consoling us about our misfortunes and promising a better future will all be fulfilled. In verse eleven we find the additional words ונתנה לך, “and He will give it to you.” The message is that at that time the land will become a permanent gift to us never again to be taken away from us. The Torah speaks of a period which we have never experienced up until this date. אל ארץ הכנעני, “to the land of the Canaanite, etc.” The land of Israel is here described as “the land of the Canaanite, seeing that Canaan was a cursed slave and it is legally impossible for such a slave to have title to any land. A slave can never take over property that belongs or belonged to his master. Seeing that the land of Israel by rights was given to the Jewish people, in the absence of the Jewish people G’d had to give it (temporarily) to such a cursed slave nation in order to ensure they could not establish legal title to that land while Israel was not around. It was similar to a king who has a minor son and who temporarily hands over his country to a regent pending his son becoming of age.

והיה כי יביאך ה' אל ארץ הכנעני, “It will be when the Lord will bring you to the land of the Canaanite,” according to Rashi all the land inhabited by the seven Canaanite tribes is included in this Nachmanides opines that this is self-evident, seeing no other tribes have ever been resident there. If anything is not clear, it is why only some (5) of the 10 tribes making up the Canaanite nation have been listed here? The view of our sages is that the lands occupied by the five tribes mentioned here is the area in the land of Israel which the Torah repeatedly describes as “the land flowing with milk and honey.” The other 2 tribes whose land was conquered by the Israelites under Joshua [not including 3 more tribes mentioned in the promise to Avraham in Genesis 15, 19-21. Ed.] was not as fruitful. Generally speaking, only six of the tribes are mentioned, as the 7th, גרגשי, according to tradition, preferred to emigrate rather than to confront Joshua militarily.

Seven days you shall eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day there is a feast before Hashem.

AND IN THE SEVENTH DAY SHALL BE A FEAST TO THE ETERNAL. This means that they are to bring their Festival-offering on the seventh day [of Passover] and are not to delay it any longer, for after that, one can no longer make amends for it. However, as far as the Festival-offering is concerned, amends can be made for the first day of the festival all seven days. Both [the first and seventh] days of Passover are alike with respect to the law of a holy convocation, as He said above, And in the first day there shall be to you a holy convocation, and in the seventh day a holy convocation.

"Seven days" — this is the service.

שבעת ימים תאכל מצות, “you will eat matzot for seven days.” Here too the Torah repeats this to leave no doubt that this law will remain in force when the people have reached their destination and settled in the land of Canaan (Israel). וביום השביעי חג, “and the seventh day you will observe as a festival.” “Why did the Torah here not mention that the first day was also to be observed as a festival?” (Our author appears to be the only one having raised this question.) Possibly it had already been answered by Sh’mot rabbah who points out that a reminder of this has already been found in verse three, where the Torah commanded “to remember this day (the 15th of Nissan) on which the Lord took you out of Egypt.”

Unleavened bread shall be eaten throughout the seven days, and no leavened food shall be seen with you, and no leaven shall be seen with you within all your borders.

"Matzot" — regarding the Sabbath, Scripture warns about "your stranger who is within your gates," for it is on that condition that he dwells within your gates — namely, that he not perform labor before you on the Sabbath. Likewise on Yom Kippur, as it is written. And likewise on Passover — that he not eat chametz in any place that is under your jurisdiction. That is the meaning of "within all your borders."

מצות יאכל את שבעת הימים,“unleavened bread shall be eaten during the duration of these seven days.” The expression את שבעת הימים is the same as if the Torah had written בשבעת הימים “on these seven days.” We find something similar in Chronicles II 30,22 ויאכלו את זבחי המועד שבעת ימים, “they ate of the sacrifices of the festival during the seven days.” Our sages there mention that the word את is meant to include the last eight hours of the 14th of the month, or if they were outside the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael that they observed an eight’s day of Passover. [Rabbi Chavell, basing himself on Torat Chayim, claims that the fact that apparently matzah was permitted already two hours before noon on the fourteenth of Nissan is proof that chametz was already forbidden. Ed.]

And you shall tell your son on that day, saying: 'It is because of this that Hashem acted for me when I went out from Egypt.'

בעבור זה FOR THE SAKE OF THIS — for the sake that I should carry out His commands, such as this Passover offering, this unleavened bread and this bitter herb (cf. Mekhilta). עשה ה' לי GOD DID FOR ME — Here is an indication of the reply to be given to the wicked son: that one should say to him, “God did for me” — and one should not say “what God did לנו, for us” — thus implying “not for thee”, for if thou hadst been there (in Egypt) thou wouldst not have been regarded as worthy of being redeemed (Mekhilta).

IT IS BECAUSE OF THAT THE ETERNAL DID FOR ME. This is equivalent to saying, “It is because of that which the Eternal did for me when I came forth out of Egypt.” A similar case is the verse: And thou shalt show them the way they are to go in, [which means “wherein they are to go”]. There are many such cases. The father is thus stating [to his son]: “It is because of that which G-d did for me when I came forth out of Egypt that I observe this service.” It is similar to that which is stated further on: Therefore I sacrifice to the Eternal all that openeth the womb. The intent of the word zeh (that) [in the verse, It is because of ‘that’], is: “tell him ‘that’ which you yourself see, i.e., what G-d did for you when you came forth out of Egypt.” And our Rabbis have explained that the word zeh (that) alludes to the unleavened bread and bitter herbs that are laid before him. It is possible that the purport of the verse, And thou shalt tell thy son… It is ‘ba’avur’ (because) of that the Eternal did for me when I came forth out of Egypt, is equivalent to the verse’s saying “such and such did G-d do unto me.” The word ba’avur also serves to indicate something within a subject itself, [and it does not only convey the idea: “because” of some other subject]. This is as the case in the verse, ‘ba’avur’ the child that was alive thou didst fast and weep, [which means “while” the child was alive], and not “because”. [David did not fast and weep “because” the child was alive; he fasted and wept “while” the child was alive so that it should get well.]Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the purport of the verse is: “Because of that which I do and worship Him by eating the Passover-offering and the unleavened bread, the Eternal did for me wonders until He brought me forth out of Egypt.” But it is not correct. I will yet explain this verse.

"Because of this" — R. Marinus explained "because of this" as if it should be inverted: "this because of what Hashem did for me." He brought many examples that he believed supported his view. In my opinion not one of them is correct, for how can we invert the words of the living God? The verse's meaning is the opposite of what he supposed: we do not eat matzot because of this; rather, the meaning of "because of this" is: because of this very service — namely the eating of matzah — and in order that no chametz be eaten, which is the first of the commandments that Hashem commanded us, Hashem performed signs for us until He brought us out of Egypt. The meaning is: He did not bring us out of Egypt except to serve Him, as it is written, "When you take the people out of Egypt, you shall serve God upon this mountain" (above, 3:12), and it is written, "who brought you out of the land of Egypt to be your God" (Num. 15:41).

והגדת לבנך, "you shall tell your son, etc." The expression והגדת instead of ואמרת is unusual and our sages in Shabbat 87 state that the term implies "words which are as tough as tendons." Another peculiarity is the expression ביום ההוא, "on that day," whereas immediately afterwards the verse concludes with the expression בעבור זה, "on account of this." The Haggadah shel Pessach as well as the Mechilta understand the verse as referring to a time when Matzah and bitter herbs are in front of you, i.e. at night. Seeing that I know that the time for that recital is at night, why did the Torah have to mention "on that day" at all? Furthermore, why do we need the word לאמור seeing that the Torah already wrote והגדת, "you shall tell?" We may have to understand all this in accordance with the statement in Pessachim 116 that when one recites the Passover story one begins with aspects which reflect discredit and concludes with aspects which reflect credit on the Jewish people. The discredit consists of the fact that our ancestors were pagans, something one can hardly boast about. The Torah therefore hints at this procedure by writing והגדת, "you will relate matters which are as tough as tendons;" you will conclude with אמירה, i.e. לאמור, words which recall that you were meritorious. The words ביום ההוא are a hint of the future redemption when the night will be called "day" (compare Psalms 139,13). It is also a reminder that the night preceding the morning of the Exodus was illuminated for the Jews (see our comment on 12,30). The Torah adds the words בעבור זה so that we will not err and conduct these ceremonies during the hours which belong to the day but at the time when we have to consume Matzah, i.e. in the evening. Possibly the words והגדת and ביום ההוא have been placed next to one another in order that we will also include the miraculous way in which that night turned into bright daylight for the Jews. Another reason that the Torah had to write the word לאמור in addition to והגדת is that the former was addressed to "your son." A father of girls or a husband not blessed with children might have concluded that since he had no son he would be free from the obligation to conduct the annual סדר celebration; the Torah writes לאמור, to tell us that even if the person is all alone he must relate what happened during that night to himself. Seeing that this is so, you may well ask why the Torah had to speak about a father telling his son at all? Perhaps I would not have known that under certain conditions one must "tell oneself" the Haggadah shel Pessach unless the Torah had used extra verbiage. Perhaps the Torah hinted that if someone is particular about telling of the Exodus, G'd will eventually grant him a son to whom he can relate these events. בעבור זה, "on account of this, etc." Perhaps the word זה (numerical value 12) alludes to 12 commandments connected with the Passover observance. The first three are the lamb, the unleavened bread, and the bitter her...

והגדת לבנך, “you will tell your son, etc.;” the son who is too young to pose the question, you will tell without his having asked: “why did G-d saw fit to make Pharaoh kick out the Jews before their dough had even had a chance to be baked into bread? Did He not have the power to keep them there until they could at least have taken baked bread with them?” You will answer the question you have put into the mouth of the שאינו יודע לשאול, the child that is as yet not curious to formulate his own questions: בעבור זה, “in order to make sure that I will observe these commandments involving the Passover sacrifice, the unleavened bread, and the bitter herbs as a commemoration of all the miracles he performed for me then when I came out of Egypt.” בעבור זה עשה ה' לי, according to Rashi this is a hint of the answer to be given to the son called רשע in the haggadah of Pessach. Rashi means that this is the answer to be given to the wicked son who does not even bother to ask about what is special on these days, and especially on the first night. The word לי, “for me,” and not for someone like him, would make this a suitable answer for the wicked son described in the haggadah as reacting to all the ritual he observes with a derisive: “why are you going to all this trouble?” The word לי implies that if he had been there at the time, G-d most certainly would not have bothered either with redeeming him or any of the miracles leading up to it.

בעבור זה עשה ה' לי, “on account of ‘this’ G’d has done for me.” The plain meaning of the verse is that “seeing that G’d has done all this for me, I will serve Him, etc.” A kabbalistic approach: The verse tells us that the fact that I was able to leave Egypt was all for the sake of His glory and His Name. It is somewhat similar to what Moses exclaimed in the song after crossing the Sea of Reeds: זה קלי ואנוהו, a complimentary reference to the שכינה including G’d’s Highest Presence. The meaning is that the שכינה in Israel is not merely something needed for the ordinary Israelite, but it is a phenomenon necessary even in celestial circles. This is what Joshua had in mind when he said (Joshua 7,9, after the Israelites’ humiliating defeat at Ai) “and what are You going to do בעבור שמך הגדול in order to bolster Your great name?” When the Torah immediately carries on (verse 9) by writing “this shall be a sign on your hand and a remembrance between your eyes,” the idea is that the concept the Torah has revealed to us here must be commemorated by us in a tangible form, i.e. by means of the phylacteries. The word והיה is an instruction to ensure that this will be realised. We have something similar in Genesis 41,47 ותעש הארץ which Onkelos translates as וכנשו “they are to gather in.” In our situation the Torah means: “He has gathered me up for the sake of His attributes.”

בעבור זה עשה ה' לי בצאתי ממצרים, “on account of this the Lord has done for me when I left Egypt.” The verse is Israel’s justification to future generations for performing the rites of gratitude on the annual celebration of Passover, and why all generations are duty bound to continue this tradition. We have a similar verse in the same vein in 13,15 על כן אני זובח לה' כל פטר רחם הזכרים וכל בני אפדה, “this is why I continue to offer as a sacrifice every first born male sheep to the Lord, whereas I redeem every first born male son of his respective mother.” The reason why the Torah uses the pronoun זה, “this,” is that you are to tell these experiences of yours to your children now. In other words, you who have experienced “this,” have to tell your children what happened on “that” day when they had not yet been born. Ibn Ezra understands the words בעבור זה וגו', to mean that G’d performed all these miracles in order for me to annually commemorate them by the performance of the rites legislated here.

בעבור זה, this was the reason G’d performed miracles for me so that I would subsequently perform this sacrificial service for Him. We find something analogous to this thought in Psalms 118,24 זה היום עשה ה' נגילה ונשמחה בו, “This is the day that the Lord has made, in order for us to exult and rejoice on it.”

And it shall be for you as a sign upon your hand and as a remembrance between your eyes, so that the Torah of Hashem may be in your mouth — for with a mighty hand Hashem brought you out from Egypt.

והיה לך לאות AND IT SHALL BE FOR A SIGN UNTO THEE — i. e. the Exodus from Egypt shall be to thee as a sign על ידך ולזכרון בין עיניך UPON THINE HAND AND AS A MEMORIAL BETWEEN THINE EYES — meaning, that you shall write these paragraphs (verses 1—10 and 11—16) and bind them upon the head and upon the arm. על ידך UPON THY HAND — on the left hand; that is why the word is written יָדְכָה in its full form (not יָדְךָ) in the second section (v. 16), so that we should explain it (by dividing this word into two: יד כה) as meaning the hand that is weak (כהה) (Menachot 36b).

AND IT SHALL BE FOR A SIGN UNTO THEE UPON THY HAND, AND FOR A MEMORIAL BETWEEN THINE EYES, THAT THE LAW OF THE ETERNAL MAY BE IN THY MOUTH; FOR WITH A STRONG HAND HATH THE ETERNAL BROUGHT THEE OUT OF EGYPT. To be interpreted [properly, the verse must be transposed]: “And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thy hand and for a memorial between thine eyes, that with a strong hand hath the Eternal brought thee out of Egypt, that the law of the Eternal may be in thy mouth.” The meaning thereof is that you are to inscribe the exodus from Egypt [in the phylacteries] upon your hand and between your eyes, and remember it always in order that G-d’s law be in your mouth, [so that you will] observe His commandments and teachings, for He is your Master Who redeemed thee out of the house of bondage.

"And it shall be for you" — there are those who dispute our holy ancestors, saying that "a sign and a memorial" is to be understood figuratively, like "for they are a garland of grace upon your head, and chains about your neck" (Prov. 1:9); and likewise "you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand" (Deut. 6:8) is like "bind them upon the tablet of your heart always" (Prov. 6:21); and likewise "you shall write them upon the doorposts of your house" (Deut. 6:9) is like "write them upon the tablet of your heart" (Prov. 3:3). And what would it mean for it to be a sign and a memorial? That Hashem's bringing you out of Egypt with a mighty hand should be constantly on your lips. This view is not correct, for at the beginning of Proverbs it is written that these are the proverbs of Solomon, and everything stated there is figurative. But nothing in the Torah is stated as a figure of speech — God forbid — rather it is to be taken literally. We therefore must not remove it from its plain meaning, for when taken literally it does not contradict reason, unlike "circumcise the foreskin of your heart" (Deut. 10:16), which we would need to adjust in accordance with reason. R. Moses ha-Kohen said that "yad" (hand) in most of Scripture refers to the left hand: "My hand has laid the foundation of the earth, and My right hand has spanned the heavens" (Isa. 45:13); "her hand she put to the tent-pin" (Judg. 5:26). The words of tradition are strong and need no further support.

כי ביד חזקה הוציאך, by changing the rules governing the inert, eternal components of nature. This point was spelled out in Joshua 4,24 when he referred to G’d having split the waters of the Jordan to enable the people to wade across. The verse there reads: “so that all the nations of the earth will know that the hand of the Lord is very powerful.”

, והיה לך לאות על ידך, “it shall be a symbol, (tangible reminder) for you on your hand (and arm);” all of this is part of what you are to tell your son. It is inscribed on the first parchment inside the phylacteries. לך לאות, “for you as a symbol;” logic dictates that first and foremost the phylacteries are to serve as historical reminder for you (sing.) on your arm (where not everyone can see it, but once you have put on phylacteries as a historical reminder for yourself, it must also serve as such for all the other Jews, (and gentiles) i.e. you must wear another one of the phylacteries on your forehead to trumpet this message to all who see you, i.e. בין עיניך, literally: “between your eyes.” Thus will be fulfilled what is written in Deuteronomy 28,10: וראו כל עמי הארץ כי שם ה' נקרא עליך, “and all the nations of the earth will see that the name of the Lord has been proclaimed upon you.”

הוציאך ה' ממצרים, “G’d has taken you out of Egypt.” In verse 14 the Torah writes: “G’d has taken us out of Egypt. This is to teach us that the redemption of the fathers was the redemption of the sons, the next and subsequent generations. This is precisely what we say annually in the Haggadah shel Pessach “He, G’d, did not only redeem our ancestors but He redeemed us, this very generation, also at the same time together with them.” We cite the verse Deut 6,23 in support of this where Moses, quoting the fathers of later generations, said: “and He took us out of there in order to bring us, to give us the land which He had sworn to our forefathers.”

והיה לך לאות על ידך ולזכרון בין עיניך, “and it shall be for you a sign on your arm and a reminder between your eyes.” This means that the passages of the Torah written here shall be worn regularly on your arm and be placed between your eyes, so that you will remember all this. The reason such a parchment is also to be placed on your arm is to symbolize the חוזק יד, “the strong hand,” G’d employed in order to orchestrate your redemption from Egypt. It is a reminder of all the miracles.

לאות על ידך, according to the true meaning: an exhortation that this memory should be with you permanently, as if the subject matter had literally been inscribed on your hand. We find a similar syntax in Song of Songs 8,6 שימי כחותם על לבך, “place it on your heart as if it had been engraved there like a seal,” בין עיניך, like a precious jewel which one places on one’s forehead as a decoration.

You shall keep this ordinance at its appointed time, from appointed time to appointed time.

מימים ימימה means FROM YEAR TO YEAR (ימים frequently signifies a year) (Menachot 36b).

"From days to days" — like "a year shall be his redemption" (Lev. 25:29). The meaning is: from year to year, with the beginning of the year determined by the proclamation of the court.

מימים ימימה, “from year to year;” this is a reminder that one has to examine one’s תפילין, phylacteries once every year to check the writing on the parchments. This is the opinion of the school of Hillel. (His disciples) They based themselves on the fact that elsewhere the meaning of the word ימים means “days,” or maximum “a year.” The school of Shammai holds that they need to be examined only once in a lifetime. Hillel the elder, is reputed to have shown someone the phylactery of his grandfather. (Mechilta, Pisscha, section 17). In the Talmud Sanhedrin folio 92b, Yehudah ben Beteyrah who claimed to be a descendant of one of the dead resurrected by the prophet Ezekiel, is reputed to have shown the phylacteries that his father had bequeathed to him as stemming from that generation. (about 300 years prior)

ושמרת את החוקה הזאת למועדה מימים ימימה, “You shall observe this decree at its designated time from year to year.” The words מימים ימימה mean “annually.” We find the expression מימים ימימה used in the sense of “years” also in Samuel I 1,3 where it describes Elkanah’s annual pilgrimage to the Temple at Shiloh. The same expression is also found in Judges 21,19 where it describes an annual pilgrimage to Shiloh being used to provide the surviving members of the tribe of Binyamin with Jewish girls for marriage. A third time the same expression is used is in connection with the annual pilgrimage to (the grave of?) Yiphtach’s daughter to commemorate what had happened to her (Judges 11,40). Rabbeinu Chananel writes that although the Torah has warned many times about observance of the Passover, this verse is not one of these occasions and it comes to tell us only that commencing with that year the date and season of the Passover festival are to be constant. This is again proof that the date was calculated and that sighting the new moon was not the crucial issue in determining the time of the festival. A Midrashic approach (Pessikta Zutrata) based on the word למועדה: ”there are designated periods when a person is to wear phylacteries and there are designated periods when he is not to wear such phylacteries.” The Sabbaths and festivals are exempt from the requirement of phylacteries seeing that the days themselves are an אות, “sign, reminder” of the historical facts the phylacteries are to remind us of. The repetition מימים ימימה refers to the day as opposed to the night. This teaches that we are not to wear phylacteries at night. An alternative meaning: the words מימים ימימה teach that we are to examine the phylacteries once a year (every twelve months) to ensure that they are in good condition. This is based on the use of the word ימים in Leviticus 25,29 ימים תהיה גאולתו, “it (the house) may be redeemed until the end of twelve months.” Just as the word ימים represents a deadline in that instance it also signifies a deadline in our verse.

את החוקה, the statute involving the Passover.

And it shall be, when Hashem brings you into the land of the Canaanites, as He swore to you and to your fathers and gives it to you —

והיה כי יביאך AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS WHEN [THE LORD] SHALL BRING THEE … [THOU SHALT SET APART etc.] — There are some of our Rabbis who learned from this statement that the firstborn who were born in the wilderness were not thus hallowed. He who says that these were thus hallowed explains this “coming” (i. e. this verse, which appears to make the hallowing of the firstborn dependent upon their arrival in the land) as follows: if you observe it (this command) in the wilderness, you will be privileged to enter the land and to observe it there (cf. Bekhorot 4b). נשבע לך HE SWORE UNTO THEE — And where did He swear this unto thee? (Exodus 6:8) “And I will bring you unto the land concerning which I did lift up my hand etc.” (cf. Rashi on this verse where he explains that “lifting up the hand” denotes taking an oath) (Mekhilta). ונתנה לך AND SHALL GIVE IT TO THEE Let it be in thine eyes (regard it) as though He had given it to thee on that same day (when on each occasion you carry out this command) and do not regard it as an inheritance from your ancestors (Mekhilta).

AND IT SHALL BE WHEN THE ETERNAL SHALL BRING THEE INTO THE LAND OF THE CANAANITES. This is stated because the law of that which “openeth the womb” [mentioned in Verse 12], applied only from the time they came to the Land of Israel. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, the verse, Sanctify unto Me all the firstborn, [mentioned in Verse 2 above] means all the firstborn living at that time. Since He redeemed them from death when He smote in the land of Egypt, He commanded [in that verse above] that they be sanctified to Him to do the work of G-d, whatever He will command them to do. He did not command them at this time concerning the redemption of the firstborn, but only after He exchanged them for the Levites and He commanded the redemption of the firstborn that were over and above the number of the Levites. But the commandment [as expressed in the verse, Sanctify unto Me all the firstborn], did not apply to the firstborn in the wilderness. Now, [in the verse before us], He commanded that when they shall come into the Land of Israel, the law should apply to the firstborn of both man and beast and the firstling of an ass, and then He commanded the law of their redemption for the generations. AS HE SWORE UNTO THEE AND TO THY FATHERS. The meaning of it is that “He swore to your fathers to give it to you,” just as it is said above, which He swore unto thy fathers to give thee. It may be that G-d’s word by itself is called “an oath,” for thus He said twice: And I am come down to deliver them out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up out of that land unto a good land, and again it says, And I will bring you in unto the land concerning which I lifted up My hand.

"And it shall be" — he singled out the Canaanite alone, for he is the father of them all. The meaning of "swore to you" is like "for to you and to your seed I will give all these lands" (Gen. 26:3).

והיה כי יביאך, "It will be when He will bring you, etc." The Torah underlines once more that it is G'd who will bring you to the Holy Land so that you should not forget about His commandments in the belief that you yourself have achieved all this, especially after your border will gradually extend further and further. Although this commandment is not applicable until after conquest of the land, it remains in force even if the land is lost as it is a commandment that involves the body and not the earth. Kidushin 36 teaches that all commandments which are performed by one's body apply throughout the ages and wherever a Jew resides.

והיה כי יביאך, “it will be when He brings you, etc.” the reason this introductory line is repeated here is so that we should not think that only the firstborn that came out of Egypt needed to be sanctified. The Torah therefore makes it clear that this law continues to apply to children born as firstborn to their parents in the Hoy Land (and in the Diaspora in due course) אל ארץ הכנעני, “to the land of the Canaanite;” the reason why the Canaanites had a legal claim to that country was that the children of Chet, a friend of Avraham, honoured Abraham and when they heard that G-d had promised this land to our forefathers, they emigrated from that land to make it available to the descendants of Avraham. In appreciation of that, G-d rewarded them by this land becoming known as “the land of Canaan.” (Mechilta Pisscha, chapter 18.) [According to my version of the Mechilta, printed in the chumash with Malbim’s commentary, it was not one of the Hittites that was so “generous,” but Canaan the grandson of Noach, whom his grandfather had cursed. According to that version he was rewarded with being given a land in Africa superior to the land in which he had resided at the time. Canaan, a grandson of Noach may well have still been alive during the lifetime of Avraham. I do not know how this jives with Canaan having been condemned to be a slave to his brothers. Ed.] כאשר נשבע לך, “as He has sworn to you.” The meaning of the line is: “you will receive it as an ancestral heritage as G-d had sworn to your forefathers.

והיה כי יביאך ה', “it will be when the Lord will bring you, etc.” The commandment to redeem the first born sons, and to sacrifice the first born male sheep, etc., do not become operative until you get to the Holy Land. Nachmanides writes that the instruction “sanctify for Me all the firstborn, etc.,” refers to all the ones fitting this definition who are now part of the Jewish community and their flocks. One of the reasons why the commandment may not have been practiced in the desert is that the boys in question had not even been circumcised. At any rate, the commandment, while in existence, remained in limbo, in common with many other commandments, until the people reached their destiny in their own land. The firstborn donkey was to be redeemed There is a dispute in the tractate Zevachim if the commandment did apply in the desert, but seeing that we cannot resolve it, it is not worth pursuing. כאשר נשבע לך ולאבותיך, “as He has sworn both to you and to your forefathers.” The meaning of this phrase is: “He has sworn to your forefathers to give it to you, the present generation.” Alternately, the Torah means that any word of G’d is equivalent to an oath, seeing that He has repeated the promise twice. He had said: (Exodus 3,8) “I will go down to save them from Egypt and to bring them up from there”, as well as: “I shall bring you to the land I swore to give to your forefathers.” Furthermore: “I will bring you to the land I swore to your forefathers.”

you shall set apart every firstborn that opens a womb before Hashem, and every firstborn of the animals that you have, the males shall be consecrated before Hashem.

והעברת This word והעברת is an expression for “setting apart”. Similarly it says, (Numbers 27:8) “And ye shall set his inheritance apart (והעברתם) for his daughter” (Mekhilta). שגר בהמה DROPPED BY BEAST— a premature birth; and this is termed שגר because its mother casts it out (שגר) and expels it (שלחתו) from the womb before its due time (שגר is a synonym of שלח “to let go”). Scripture teaches you that although it is a premature birth it is nevertheless holy by reason of its being first born, in so far that it exempts from the law regarding the firstborn the young that comes (is born) after it (Mekhilta). It is true that an animal that is not a premature birth) is also called שגר, as (Deuteronomy 7:13) “the שגר of thy kine” (where it speaks of blessing this, and it is therefore evident that it cannot there denote a premature birth), but this שגר (i. e. its use here) is intended only to tell us something about a premature birth, because, you see, it has already written in this verse: “Every first offspring of the womb”! And if you say that also the firstborn of an unclean animal (and not a premature birth) is implied by שגר (and that this also must be hallowed) then I reply that Scripture comes and expressly states in another passage, (Deuteronomy 15:19) “[All the firstling males that are born] of thy herd and of thy flocks (thus only clean animals) [shalt thou sanctify etc.]”. Another meaning may be given in explanation of והעברת כל פטר רחם “thou shalt set apart every first born of the womb” — viz., that Scripture by the term פטר רחם is speaking of the firstborn of man (consequently the following words, שגר בהמה, need not denote an animal of premature birth, but an animal born in the natural course as it certainly means in Deuteronomy 7:13, and we thus avoid the necessity of here assigning to שגר a meaning different from that which it bears in the latter passage).

V’HA’AVARTA’ UNTO THE ETERNAL ALL THAT OPENETH THE WOMB. This is an expression of setting apart, i.e., that one is to remove the firstling from the flock and it is to be for the Eternal. Then He reverts and explains that this “setting apart” means that every first male offspring dropped by a beast, and every first offspring of an ass and every firstborn son of a man shall be the Eternal’s. But Rashi commented: “And thou shalt set apart unto the Eternal all that openeth the womb. Scripture is speaking of the firstborn of man.”

"And you shall cause to pass" — you shall pass it over to Hashem's name, so that it not be mixed with the rest. These are the two commandments that were commanded on the fifteenth day. "Sheger" — on the pattern of "eretz," which does not change in the construct form. However there exist anomalous words that do change, and they are: "shgar alafekha" (Deut. 7:13), "u-vchadar mishkavkha" (above, 7:28), "havel havalim" (Eccl. 1:2), "misepach chematekha" (Hab. 2:15), and "segor daltkha" (Isa. 26:20). I have found no more.

והעברת כל פטר רחם לה, “you shall set apart for the Lord every first issue of the womb;” we encounter a similar expression in Numbers 27,8: והעברתם את נחלתו אל בתו, “you will set side his inheritance for his daughter.” In that instance, the inheritance of potential male heirs is set aside for a female heir, a daughter if there is one. Here too, the firstborn is set apart from the other heirs as an inheritance for the Lord. וכל פטר שגר בהמה, likewise every male firstling that emerges from the womb of a beast;” at that time the Israelites did not own any ritually impure beasts except donkeys; (no camels or horses) this is why there was no need for the Torah to add the expression: טהורה, “ritually pure,” in our verse.

והעברת כל פטר רחם לה', “you will transfer every firstborn of the womb to Hashem.” The Torah employs the term העברה in this instance to indicate that the status of being something secular has been removed from such firstborn seeing it had already been designated as sacred while inside the רחם אמו, the womb of its mother.

והעברת כל פטר רחם, “you shall set apart every first born issue of the womb, etc.” Rashi says that the verse speaks of human firstborns, seeing that there is a break in the verse before it continues mentioning first born animals. Nachmanides writes that the word והעברת refers to the setting apart of these animals from the flock as something sacred for G’d. Having made that point, the Torah goes into further detail, commencing with the words וכל פטר שגר בהמה, detailing three categories of firstborns.

והעברת, you will remove it from your flock and give it to the priest to offer as a sacrifice. שגר, an expression describing something being ejected from the belly, the womb.

And every firstborn of a donkey you shall redeem with a lamb, and if you do not redeem it, you shall break its neck. And every firstborn of man among your sons you shall redeem.

פטר חמור AND EVERY FIRST OFFSPRING OF AN ASS — but not the first offspring of other unclean animals. This exception is the enactment of Scripture, because the firstborn of the Egyptians are compared to asses (Ezekiel 23:20; Bereishit Rabbah 96); and a further reason for this exception is because they (the asses) were of assistance to the Israelites when they left Egypt, for there was not a single Israelite who did not take with him from Egypt several asses laden with the silver and gold of Egypt. (Bekhorot 5b). תפדה בשה THOU SHALT REDEEM WITH A LAMB — one gives a lamb to the priest, and the first offspring of the ass is then permitted to be made use of, whilst the lamb remains in the priest’s possession with the character of a non-holy object (חולין — an ordinary animal) (cf. Bekhorot 9b). וערפתו THEN THOU SHALT BREAK ITS NECK — one breaks its neck with a hatchet from behind and so slays it (Bekhorot 13a). The reason is: he (the owner of the ass) has caused a loss to the possessions of the priest (by not giving him the lamb), therefore must he suffer loss in his own possessions (Mekhilta d['Rabbi Yishmael 13:13:2). וכל בכור בניך תפדה AND ALL THE FIRSTBORN OF MAN AMONGST THY SONS SHALT THOU REDEEM — His redemption money is fixed in another passage (Numbers 18:16) at five Sela’im.

"And every firstling of a donkey" — since it is impure, you shall redeem it with a lamb. "Ve-arafto" — some say: you write upon its neck 'holy.' To one who says such a thing I say: this would mean it is a stiff-necked donkey. For it is written, "He shall break down their altars" (Hos. 10:2) and "they broke the heifer's neck in the wadi" (Deut. 21:4) — the explanation is to cut the nape of the neck, as the transmitters of the religion have explained. For every firstborn that is not brought near the altar and is not redeemed is subject to death, since all the firstborn of Egypt — man and beast — died; Hashem did not spare them from the decree He decreed upon the firstborn of Egypt, but rather designated Israel's firstborn for His service. Israel had no impure animals except donkeys alone; therefore a firstborn of any other species is not redeemed.

וכל פטר חמור, “and every firstling of a donkey;” this paragraph has been repeated because the laws about the firstlings of donkeys, and the redemption of them was a totally new concept. בבניך תפדה, “as well as amongst your sons, you have to redeem.” This law did not become applicable until after the Levites had become sanctified in lieu of the firstborn sons during the second year of the Israelites in the desert. (Numbers 3,45)

וכל פטר חמור, “and every firstborn donkey, etc.” This legislation is restricted to the donkey, the only impure domestic animal whose firstborn male issue is not of secular status (as opposed to horses and camels, also widely considered as domestic beasts). Pessikta Zutrata on our verse explains that the reason is that the Egyptians have been compared to donkeys by the prophet Ezekiel (23,20) who wrote “their flesh (male organ) is the flesh of donkeys.” An additional reason is the tradition that even the poorest of the Israelites left Egypt with ninety donkeys’ loads of silver and gold. To commemorate the immense wealth the Israelites took out of Egypt the Torah legislated that the beasts which carried that wealth be treated as in a class by themselves. The firstborn males of such donkeys needed to be redeemed before they could be used for profane purposes. Equating donkeys with Egyptians reminds one of the plague of the dying of the firstborn Egyptians.

תפדה, after the Levites had been sanctified to take the place of the firstborn who had participated in the sin of the golden calf, in the second year after the Tabernacle had been erected and inaugurated. At that time you will take 5 shekalim per head (Numbers 3,47) to effect this exchange. It included Levites of one month and up (males) Numbers 18,16)

And it shall be, when your son asks you tomorrow, saying: 'What is this?' — you shall say to him: 'With a mighty hand Hashem brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage.'

כי ישאלך בנך מחר WHEN THY SON ASKETH THEE מחר — There is a usage of the word מחר that refers to “now” (i. e. to the period of time that is nearest to “now” viz., to-morrow), and there is another usage of מחר that refers to a day following after the lapse of some time, as, for example, this מחר here and as, for example, (Joshua 22:27) “That your children may not say to our children in time to come (מחר)” which occurs in the chapter about the sons of Gad and the sons of Reuben (Mekhilta). מה זאת WHAT IS THIS? — This is the question of a dull child who has not sufficient understanding to question very profoundly and who therefore asks in an indefinite fashion, “What is this?” In another passage (Deuteronomy 6:20) it states, “[When thy son asketh thee…], What mean the testimonies and the statutes and the judgments … [which the Lord our God hath commanded you?]” This, however, is the question of a wise son. The Torah in mentioning four different explanations of the Passover sacrifice-rite to be given by a father to his children, is speaking in reference to four different types of son: the wicked son (12:25 and in the second half of 13:8), and one who has not sufficient understanding how to ask (in the first half of 13:8), and one who asks in an indefinite manner (13:14), and one who asks in a wise fashion (Deuteronomy 6:20) (cf. Mekhilta; Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim 10:4).

"And it shall be" — R. Judah ha-Levi, of blessed memory, said that "machar" (tomorrow) is written defectively without an alef, and its meaning is: whatever comes after today.

מה זאת?, a reference to the unusual legislation of having to redeem the firstborn impure animal donkey seeing that its body could not have been sanctified due to its inherent impurity. Similarly, the need to break this animal’s neck as an alternative to redeeming it sounds peculiar to the son who is asking. בחוזק יד הוציאנו ה' ממצרים, due to the urgency with which the Egyptians wanted to get rid of us (12,33) we left Egypt traveling in coaches, just as the family of Yaakov had arrived in Egypt hundreds of years ago in coaches supplied by Pharaoh himself. Both the coaches materialised miraculously, as well as the many donkeys needed to transport the new found riches of the people. Seeing that the donkeys had therefore had a constructive part to play in the redemption of the Israelites, this is reflected in their not being treated like all other impure beasts. This degree of minor sanctity accorded the firstborn donkey may be redeemed in exchange for a pure animal, so that the donkey can then be used in the regular way.

והיה כי ישאלך בנך, "It will be when your son enquires of you, etc." The Torah means that when your son observes you perform the ceremony of redeeming a firstborn he will ask you the reason for that commandment. In that event you are obligated to explain the meaning of the commandment. If the son does not ask you, you are not obligated to answer him except on the night of the Passover. This is the reason the Torah added the word מחר, "tomorrow;" This means that even if your son will ask you already tomorrow you are immediately obligated to tell him the reason for this commandment. The Torah adds the word לאמור to indicate that what is meant is a situation when your son expects an answer to his question. If the son, however, simply asks מה זאת, i.e. "what is this all about?" a derisive way of questioning, then you are under no obligation to answer him at that time. The question need not necessarily be exactly "what is this all about?" Any question whose upshot appears to be that the questioner wants to be told what our tradition is all about is to be answered forthwith. It is clear therefore that the Torah does not speak of the night of the Passover but of the commandment to sanctify the firstborn of the womb. When our sages (Mechilta) comment that the four occasions when the Torah cites the sons as asking refer to four different types of children this is all homiletics.

?מה זאת, “what is the significance of this?” Seeing that your son observes that neither a gentile nor an uncircumcised Israelite is permitted to partake of the Passover meat, something that sets the festival of Passover apart from all other festivals, he is entitled to ask the reason for this. An alternate explanation: the words: מה זאת, do not refer to Passover and the unleavened bread, the reason for which we have already read about. However, the son asks, on the new concept of redeeming something that was perceived as sacred for something that was perceived as secular; you, the father, are to answer him in the words of the Torah that we imitate what G-d had done with the firstborn sons and beasts of the Israelites in Egypt on that night when He exempted them from execution at His hands. In exchange for being saved, we offer a sacrifice.

“When your son asks you tomorrow, saying, ‘What is this?’” The author of the Haggadah said that this verse speaks about the simple son. Rabbi Yitzchak Abarbanel, in his book Zevach Pesach, questioned how we know that this refers to the simple son; perhaps he is speaking mockingly, saying What is this? like the wicked son. He answered that we learn from the response that God commanded to answer him: With a strong hand, the Lord brought us out of Egypt. Since God commanded to answer him appropriately, certainly he must have asked appropriately. But this answer is not appropriate, and all who see it will say, What is this? For it is obvious that anyone who says What is this? is simple. And if His intention is revealed before the Blessed One, is it revealed to us? And how will I know what is in the heart of the questioner? Even the Torah does not foretell such things. And what seems closest to me to say about this, is that the author of the Haggadah finds it difficult [to understand] why “tomorrow” [machar] is mentioned with two sons: 1. in this verse, 2. in Parashat Va’etchanan (6:20) When your son asks you tomorrow, saying… And with the other two sons, the term “tomorrow” is not mentioned. On the contrary, it says And you shall tell your son on that very day, which is the opposite of “tomorrow.” The difficulty is why doesn’t it mention “tomorrow” for all of them, or “on that day” for all of them? And furthermore, it is difficult to understand why the Torah mentions the question What is this“ regarding the redemption of the firstborn, and why doesn’t it mention this question regarding the Passover sacrifice, matzah, and bitter herbs, as it does with the wicked son and the one who does not know how to ask. It is since he is forced by these questions that the author of the Haggadah has determined that this verse speaks of the simple son, while the verse in Parashat Va’etchanan speaks of the wise son. And the word “tomorrow” mentioned in both does not refer to some future time but literally means the next day. Because the simple son, as long as his father gives him the Passover sacrifice, matzah, and bitter herbs, doesn’t ask anything at all. He certainly doesn’t mock the service and commandments of God, and he doesn’t seek a reason for the commandment either. He would be happy to be fed roasted delicacies and fine flour matzah with bitter herbs [which are typically eaten to stimulate appetite] all day long. Why would the simple son ask for a reason for all these things when he lacks nothing for his soul? However, regarding the redemption of the firstborn, where he is not given anything but rather is asked to give the redemption money himself, then he asks What is this“ Because even a completely simple and foolish person becomes wise when it comes to holding onto money, not wanting to give any money to anyone for no reason. Yet from the word ”tomorrow“ we learn that this person is simple and upright and does not mock the giving nor refuse it. On the day they ask him for the redemption money, he says nothing and gives his money without asking to know the reason, so that they won’t suspect him of not giving willingly or think he is complaining about God’s commandment by saying, ”Why should I give my money for nothing?“ Therefore, he remains silent on the day of giving and pays his money to fulfill God’s commandment. Nevertheless, on the following day, he asks What is this? because he wants to know the reason why God commanded us to give money for the redemption of the firstborn. And this sign the Torah gave us, that if your son asks you tomorrow, What is this? on the day after the giving and on the day of the giving he doesn’t ask anything, then certainly he is asking What is this? with an innocent heart and clean hands. For if he were mocking or protesting against God’s commandments, he would have spoken on the day of the giving in order to prevent the giving. And since he was silent on the day of the giving and asks on the following day, he is certainly innocent and upright and asks properly, therefore you should respond to him properly that with a strong hand the Lord brought us out of Egypt and the Lord killed every firstborn, etc. Or if the son sees his father giving the redemption money for a firstborn animal and doesn’t ask him anything on the day of the giving, so that he won’t be suspected of wanting to prevent his father from fulfilling the commandment, and he asks him the next day, he too is considered innocent. And because he asks briefly, What is this? and doesn’t have the knowledge to detail all the matters, from this it was judged that he is simple and not sharp enough to be precise about the details of the matter. But if he had asked this question on the day of the giving, it could be that he is not innocent. And so the verse “when your son asks you tomorrow,” which appears in the portion of Va’etchanan and is interpreted as referring to the question of the wise son, also uses the term tomorrow to mean the day after performing the service. For the wise son is afraid to ask on the day of performing the mitzvah lest those who hear him suspect that he is mocking the commandments while they are being performed in order to distract the people from the service of God. For in any case, many people question what distinguishes the words of the wicked son from the words of the wise son, and not many are wise enough to differentiate between them through precise language analysis, so they might suspect him of mockery. To avoid this suspicion, he also asks on the day after the performance. But the wicked son, whose entire intention is to distract the people from the service of God, therefore speaks his words during the performance of the mitzvah and mocks them saying, “What are you busy with? Should elders like you be occupied with such trivial matters?” Therefore, the term tomorrow is not mentioned in his words. That is why the Torah says, You shall tell your son on that day — just as he speaks his words on that day of performance, so too you should tell him your words immediately. For we have already said that this verse contains instruction for two sons. If it is for the wicked son, it is obvious that you need to answer him immediately lest he become wise in his own eyes thinking that you have no answer, and that’s why you put him off saying, “Come back tomorrow and I will give you an answer.” Therefore, Answer a fool according to his folly immediately on that day. And if it is for the son who does not know how to ask, why would you tell him your words tomorrow? Isn’t it more appropriate to tell him when the matzah and bitter herbs are placed before you, in order to draw his heart to the service of God? And in passing, I will also explain the words of the wise son mentioned in the portion of Va’etchanan, as one could ask about the statement that says “You too should tell him according to the laws of Passover: ‘One does not eat dessert after the Passover sacrifice.’” Why doesn’t it mention the response written alongside it in the portion of Va’etchanan (6:21)? I say that the wise son asks about the reason for the Passover sacrifice, matzah, and bitter herbs in the order they are written in the Torah, as it says (12:8), And they shall eat the meat roasted over fire… and matzah with bitter herbs. Regarding these three, he asks, What are the testimonies, statutes, and judgments? Regarding the roasted meat of the Passover sacrifice, he says, What is the testimony? For the slaughtering of the Passover sacrifice gives faithful testimony that the Holy One, blessed be He, rules over the celestial order, even over the constellation of Aries, which is the firstborn and head of all constellations, and certainly over the other constellations, as it says, And the blood will be a sign for you. For every sign is a testimony and proof of something, as explained above in the verse This month shall be for you (12:2). The statutes refers to the matzah, which represents humility, like this dough that does not rise upward, as all this is well explained in my small work Orach L’Chaim, discourse 25. For every statute [chok] indicates something that has a limit and boundary, as it says regarding the sea (Job 38:10), I imposed My limit [chuki] upon it and set a bar and doors. Similarly, a limit and boundary was given to the matzah dough so that it would not rise, for from it we learn about humility. Therefore, matzah is a symbol of freedom, because by virtue of humility our ancestors were redeemed from Egypt, as it says (Deuteronomy 7:7), Not because you are more numerous than all the peoples did the Lord desire you and choose you, for you are the fewest of all the peoples. By virtue of your making yourselves small before Me [you were chosen]. Therefore, leavened bread [chametz] must be burned because anyone who is arrogant is judged by fire, as mentioned in the Yalkut (Parashat Tzav 480) on the verse It is the burnt offering on its pyre, because the nature of fire is to rise upward, so one who rises up [in arrogance] is judged by it. And chametz is forbidden even in the smallest amount because this is the measure for haughtiness — in all character traits a person should follow the middle path, except for haughtiness, about which our Sages said (Sotah 5a), “Not any of it, not even a part of it.” Thus, they prohibited even the slightest amount. Similarly, our Sages said (Avot 4:4), “Be exceedingly humble in spirit,” emphasizing the matter and distancing it completely. The judgments alludes to they embittered their lives, for the judgments carried out against Egypt were because they made our ancestors’ lives bitter. Afflictions are called “judgment,” as it says (Isaiah 28:26), He disciplines him for judgment. After mentioning the wise son’s question about the Passover sacrifice, unleavened bread, and bitter herbs, the Torah instructs you to reverse the order in your response, first explaining the reason for the bitter herbs, then the unleavened bread, and finally the Passover sacrifice. This is to teach the wise son the proper order for acquiring spiritual perfection. The sequence is as follows: First, a person must bring their physical nature into “the crucible of poverty” to purify and refine it from impurity, which leads to humility before their Creator. Through this humility, one comes to recognize the existence of the Holy One, blessed be He. This is why God brought Israel into the “crucible of affliction” in Egypt — to purify their physical nature and bring them to a state of humility, through which they would come to recognize God’s existence. These first two stages serve as preparation for the third, which is knowledge of God’s existence, as this is the ultimate purpose and goal of all the commandments — to bring them to faith in Him, blessed be He. As it is written, Draw out and take for yourselves a lamb — withdraw your hands from idolatry and take a lamb for the service of God. This is the meaning of “you shall also tell him” — even though in performing the commandment, the Passover sacrifice is mentioned first because it is the ultimate purpose and of primary importance, nevertheless, you should respond about the Passover sacrifice last, following the order of response mentioned there, as will be explained. And do not be mistaken to say, that the Torah reversed the order of the answer in a manner of “it concludes with what it began,” but rather with complete intention did the Torah reverse the order and say that you should answer him first about the bitter herbs, and afterward about the matzah, and about the Passover sacrifice at the end, according to the order of acquiring perfection. This is so that he would learn from this that the Passover sacrifice, which comes last, is the main thing. For this reason, neglecting the Passover sacrifice carries the punishment of karet, which is not the case with matzah and bitter herbs — even one who does not eat matzah and bitter herbs is not liable to karet. And the author of the Haggadah commanded to bring him a sound and good proof from the laws of Passover, where our Sages of blessed memory said (Pesachim 119b): “One may not have any dessert after the Passover sacrifice.” The reason is so that the taste of the Passover sacrifice remains in his mouth at the end. And why were they not particular that the taste of matzah or bitter herbs should remain in his mouth at the end? Rather, it is because the Passover sacrifice is the main thing and the ultimate desired purpose of eating matzah and bitter herbs, namely because the Passover sacrifice is a demonstration of faith in the Holy One, blessed be He. And this is [the meaning of] “you too shall tell him,” that is to say, just as the Torah reversed the order, so should you also respond to him, and this is the meaning of “too.” And if your son asks you why the Torah reversed the order, bring him proof from the laws of Passover, where our Sages said, “One does not conclude after the Passover sacrifice with an afikoman.” From here, bring him proof that just as the taste of the Passover sacrifice should remain in his mouth at the end, so too in the response to the questioning son, it needs to be at the end, in the order that it is stated in the Torah. And the intention is to respond to him with all the verses stated in the Torah regarding the question of the wise son, and this is their order: First, it says there, And you shall tell your son, ‘We were slaves,’ etc. until And the Lord commanded us, for all this is the reason for the bitter herbs, which come as a remembrance of the slavery, as it is said, And they embittered their lives with hard labor. And afterward it says, And the Lord commanded us to perform all these statutes, etc., until And it will be righteousness for us. And all this is the reason for the matzah, which is called a statute, as explained above, that it indicates submission and humility. And it is written The consequence of humility is the fear of the Lord (Proverbs 22:4), and similarly it says here, to perform these statutes to fear the Lord, for submission leads to fear. And then it says, And it will be righteousness for us until the end of the passage. All of this is an answer regarding the Passover sacrifice, which comes as a testimony to His sovereignty, blessed be He. For regarding the commandment of the Passover, it says, and I will pass over you, which Rashi explains as “and I will have mercy.” This means that now you will leave the domain of the celestial signs, whose actions are all necessary and natural, and they have no power to perform any action out of mercy, compassion, and righteousness. And you will enter under the wings of the Divine Presence, whose actions, blessed be He, are with absolute will, and who works salvations and performs righteousness out of mercy. And this is [the meaning of], And it will be righteousness for us when we observe to perform all this commandment. For many commandments depend on the commandment of Passover, therefore it is said all this commandment, meaning a specific commandment upon which many commandments depend, before the Lord our God. This means that through this commandment, we will leave the control of the celestial system and stand before the Lord our God to enter under the shadow of His wings. And this is the intention of Passover, and the wise person will increase understanding.

כי בחוזק יד הוציאנו ממצרים, “for with a strong hand did He take us out of Egypt.” Having said this as a kind of “headline,” the Torah now continues to describe how this “hand” of G’d manifested itself. It was primarily the simultaneous killing of the firstborn that resulted immediately in the release of the Israelites. The contrast with the earlier plagues, which did not result in the release of the Israelites, is clear to anyone. This is why I perform sacrificial rites on every anniversary of that event.

And it came to pass that when Pharaoh was stubborn about letting us go, Hashem slew every firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of man to the firstborn of beast. Therefore I sacrifice before Hashem every firstborn that opens a womb, the males, and every firstborn of my sons I redeem.

"And it was" — he began by saying "with a mighty hand He brought us out," then returned to explain what that mighty hand was: it was the smiting of the firstborn, for it was by means of this that they went out of Egypt, and not by means of the earlier plagues. Thus the psalmist said, "He who smote Egypt through their firstborn, for His lovingkindness endures forever" (Ps. 136:10). Moses took a brief form, for it was well known that by saying "Hashem slew every firstborn" He saved our firstborn and the firstborn of our animals — and it is in connection with this that "therefore I sacrifice" is linked, not with the slaying of the firstborn. "Every firstling of the womb among the males" — from the species fit to be sacrificed before Hashem.

ויהי כי בקשה פרעה, seeing that Pharaoh had put so many obstacles in the path of our eventual liberation he is himself compared to a donkey as we know from Ezekiel 23,20, the prophet describing the flesh of the Egyptians as similar to donkeys. Pharaoh could have easily redeemed himself by releasing the Israelites, i.e. the Israelites are compared to the שה, the lamb. As a result of failing to do so, G’d chose to kill the firstborn instead. כל בכור בארץ מצרים, the fact that the Torah does not speak about “every Egyptian firstborn,” but about “every firstborn in Egypt,” shows that basically, the Israelites, i.e. their firstborn were also guilty of death at the hands of G’d. He saved them by sanctifying them as His personal property. על כן אני זובח, this act of grace by G’d at the time is the reason that I annually express my gratitude by slaughtering the firstborn male of any pure animal. [after giving it to the priest. Ed.] Seeing that the firstborn donkeys or any other impure animal are unfit as offerings on the altar, I redeem them in order to be able to make secular use of these animals as beasts of burden, etc. As far as the firstborn of my own sons are concerned, seeing that they were sanctified from birth, I redeem them in order that they can lead regular lives, as the priesthood is no longer an option for such firstborn ever since the sin of the golden calf.

ולטוטפות בין עיניך, “and as an ornament between your eyes.” The word טוטפות describes the part of the head on which the phylacteries are worn. The expression appears in tractate Shabbat, 57B as the area where the straps of the phylacteries surround the forehead. Alternately, it describes the part of the head which faces the ground, as per the proverb in Megillah 14 that ducks have a tendency to appear to look at the ground while at the same time seeing far into the distance with their eyes. The word used to describe this kind of vision is מטיפין. The reason the Torah uses the word לטוטפות in the plural mode is because, according to an ancient tradition, the phylacteries of the head are divided into 4 separate compartments, each containing one of the relevant four paragraphs of the Torah referring to the subject. Nachmanides writes that the origin of the custom to wear the phylacteries of the hand on the upper left arm, and the phylacteries of the head on one’s forehead, is that Judaism if taken seriously, requires input by both the heart and the brain, the upper left arm being close to man’s heart, whereas the forehead is immediately outside the seat of the brain. This is the reason why the Torah says that the Exodus and all that it implies should be symbolized “between your eyes,” i.e. the phylacteries with the relevant paragraphs from the Torah should be positioned on the part of body closest to the seat of our memory banks. Brain functions properly only because man has a faculty that enables him to store sensations called memory. The knot with which the straps of the phylacteries of the head is tied, is placed at the rear end of the head, the area near which our memory banks are located in the brain. References to the phylacteries appear in the paragraph dealing with sanctification of the firstborn, as well as in the paragraph detailing observance of that commandment once the Israelites would take possession of the Holy Land, seeing this particular commandment is tied directly to the Exodus from Egypt, as something which must remain as a kind of visual image. The other commandment, also contained in one of these paragraphs, commits to our memory the fact that our G’d is unique and has demonstrated unique powers. The obligation to perform the commandments of the Torah is anchored in these two fundamental considerations. [Moses sums this up in Deut. 4,35 אתה הראת לדעת: “you (the Jewish people as the only one) have been granted visual evidence of the existence and manifestation of power of the Lord your G’d.” Ed.] I will now proceed to explain some general rules applicable to many of the commandments of the Torah. [this is still Nachmanides. Ed.] Ever since idolatry exists in our world, starting with the generation of Enosh, [a grandson of Adam! Ed.] mankind’s knowledge about G’d the Creator has become confused. Some people claimed that the universe preceded ”G’d,” whereas others deny only that G’d the Creator has any knowledge of any specific individual; still others do believe that G’d has such knowledge but they dispute that G’d supervises and directly or indirectly intervenes in the fate of individual people. By doing this, they reduce mankind to the level of the fish in the ocean over whom G’d does indeed not exercise individual supervision. As a result of this lack of G’d’s supervision of man’s individual fate, the concept of reward and punishment does not apply to man either. Once G’d intervenes in the world by performing acts involving the community or an individual, this discredits all those who deny that the Creator still has an interest in the well being or otherwise of His subjects on earth. If such intervention by G’d in people’s lives, or the performance of super-natural miracles have been announced in advance and with specific dates and places, this still better authenticates our belief that the Creator does indeed continue to take a supervisory interest in His creatures. It demonstrates that G’d communicates with chosen individuals and reveals His secrets to them. By doing such things on occasion, the truth of the Torah is perpetuated, and this is why the Torah wrote in connection with such advertised miracles:למען תדע כי אני ה' בקרב הארץ “in order that you will realize that I the Lord am active on earth.” (Exodus 8,18) This disabuses people who believe that historical and other events on earth are the result of pure chance. In Exodus 9,29 למען תדע כי לה' הארץ, the Torah tells us that the miracles that are about to occur will demonstrate ownership of the earth by G’d, rebutting those who claim that the universe preceded the existence of G’d. G’d created the universe out of “nothing,” i.e. He provided matter, without which there could not be a material universe. Finally, the Torah quotes G’d saying: למען תדע כי אין כמוני, “in order that you should know that there is No One like I.” (Exodus 9,14) These were the three theological principles which Pharaoh had denied, and it took all the plagues to convince him that not only had he been wrong, but that he had been a terrible sinner. Having established that even such a pagan as Pharaoh had finally become convinced of the error of his ways, surely, no one in his right mind expects a private revelation by G’d of His powers every time he entertains some doubt about something! In view of the unreasonable nature of such a request, G’d provided us with some commandments, the performance of which is designed to keep alive within us the memory of the lessons learned not only by Pharaoh but also by the Jewish people at the time. Affixing the relevant passages of the Torah to the doorposts of our homes and gates, placing the phylacteries containing these passages on our heads and arms daily, are all part of this training in remembering that what our forefathers transmitted to us as experiences they lived through had indeed occurred, and we have reason to be eternally grateful for G’d’s intervention in the lives of our forefathers at that time. The story of the Exodus and what preceded it is not only a lesson in the kindness G’d extended to a people who had become assimilated and was outwardly, and mostly inwardly, indistinguishable from its host nation, but is a basic lesson in what constitutes our perception of what we are about, and what ultimately, the universe is about, i.e. the greatness of the Creator. Our sages taught us to relate to so-called מצוות קלות, commandments which because they appear easy to fulfill are not presumed to confer much reward for those observing them, as if they were of the same weightiness as מצוות חמורות, commandments which either are difficult to fulfill, or which carry death penalties as an indication that G’d appears to be more concerned about them than about the other kind. It is not up to us to evaluate the relative merit of G’d’s commandments. What is important for us to remember is that just because G’d does watch over what we are doing, none of us can afford not to be engaged in some manner of service of the Lord, even if such service is indirect, such as earning a living in order to honour the Sabbath by eating better quality food, and wearing better quality clothes. etc. We must at all times retain the awareness that we are G’d’s creatures, and as such we must be guided in our behaviour by the desire to please our Creator. We cannot lay claim to even part of the rewards of observing the Torah until we have embraced it by believing fully what our sages have taught us. We must be convinced that unless we, the Jewish people, collectively will observe the Torah, we cannot for long survive successfully. Our continued existence is bound up with remaining loyal to the covenant G’d made with Avraham, our first patriarch. Our mode of conduct must be living testimony to the ongoing existence and benevolent interest of G’d in His people and mankind at large.

ויהי כי הקשה, all of this you are to tell your son. This is also clear from verse 16 where it is stated that this whole paragraph was said by G’d to Moses. The Israelite is to say to his son: “G’d has taken us out of Egypt.” Moses did not say this verse to the people on his own account, [he could not refer to himself as having been redeemed seeing he had not been enslaved. Moses’ sons had not been enslaved either. Ed.]

And it shall be as a sign upon your hand and as tefillin between your eyes, for with a mighty hand Hashem brought us out from Egypt."

ולטטפת this denotes the Tephillin; and because they consist of four houses (compartments) they are called טטפת, for טט denotes “two” in Katpi and פת in Afriki denotes “two ״ (Sanhedrin 4b). Menachem ben Seruk, however, placed it in the same section (gave it the same meaning) as, (Ezekiel 21:2) “And speak (הטף) to the south ״; and as, (Micah 2:6) “speak ye (תטיפו) not”; so that טטפת would be an expression denoting “speaking”, and corresponds to ולזכרון (in v. 9 where it really replaces טוטפת), because whoever sees them (the Tephillin) bound between the eyes will remember the miracle (so that they become a זכרון, a reminder) and will speak about it (so that they become a טטפת. something that causes one to speak about the miracle).

ULTOTAPHOTH’ BETWEEN THINE EYES. No affinity is known to this word. Linguists, however, associated it with the expressions: ‘v’hateiph’ (And speak) to the south; And my word ‘titoph’ (dropped) upon them. The figurative usage thereof is based on the verse: And the mountains shall drop (‘v’hitiphu’) sweet wine. Thus the verse is saying that you should make the exodus from Egypt a sign upon your hand, and between your eyes a source for discourse distilling as the dew upon those that hear it. Our Rabbis, however, have called an object which lies upon the head totaphoth, just as they have said: “[A woman] may not go out [on the Sabbath] with a totepheth or head-bangles.” Rabbi Abahu said: “What is totepheth? It is a forehead-band extending from ear to ear.” Now it is the Rabbis [of the Talmud] who are the [true Hebrew] linguists, as they spoke the language and knew it and it is from them that we should accept [the explanation of the word ultotaphoth].Now Scripture says totaphoth [in the plural] and not totepheth [in the singular] because there are many compartments in the phylacteries, just as we have received their form from the holy fathers who saw the prophets and the ancient ones up to Moses our teacher doing so. Now the fundamental reason of this commandment is that we lay the script of the exodus from Egypt upon the hand and upon the head opposite the heart and the brain, which are the pivots of thought. Thus we are to inscribe [on parchment] the Scriptural sections of Kadesh (Sanctify unto Me) [Verses 1-10], and V’haya ki y’viacha (And it shall be when the Eternal shall bring thee) [Verses 11-16], and enclose them in the phylacteries because of this commandment wherein we were charged to make the exodus from Egypt for frontlets between our eyes. [We are also to inscribe and enclose in the phylacteries the sections of] Sh’ma (Hear O Israel) [Deuteronomy 6:4-9] and V’haya im shamo’a (And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken) [ibid., 11:13-21] because we are charged to have the commandments [of the Torah] also for frontlets between our eyes, as it is written: And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart; and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes. This is why we also inscribe [on parchment] these two sections — [Sh’ma and V’haya im shamo’a] — for frontlets [even though the exodus is not mentioned in them], for they contain the commandments of the Unity of G-d, the memorial of all commandments, the doctrine of retribution, which states that the consequence of disobeying the commandments is punishment and that blessings come in the wake of obedience — and the whole foundation of the faith. Now of the phylactery of the arm, Scripture says, And it shall be for a sign unto thee upon thy hand, which the Rabbis explained as referring to the left arm, which is opposite the heart. By way of the Truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], the verse, It is because of ‘zeh’ (this) which the Eternal did for me, is simila...

"And it shall be" — he mentioned regarding both commandments, "and it shall be a sign upon your hand" — and what our Sages transmitted regarding writing the Torah portions is the truth. "Le-totafot" — meaning a memorial. Some say the tet is doubled and the word's meaning is like "speech," derived from "hattef el darom" (prophesy toward the south, Ezek. 21:2). This seems far-fetched to me.

[This is a comment to the Torah’s statement, “It shall be a sign upon your Hand ידכה .”] Our Rabbis of blessed memory said (Menachot 37a), “’Yadchah (spelled with an extra hey implies the weaker hand (yad kehah), which is the left hand. We need to understand why Hashem did not choose the right hand to perform this mitzvah, since it is greater. Our Rabbis say that this is in order that (the tefillin) be aligned next to the heart, which is towards the left side (of the body), and their words are true. However it appears to me that there is an additional reason, for the Torah itself gives a reason for the matter in saying, “Because with a strong hand.” You need to know that HaShem has 2 aspects within His attributes. The first is called “the great hand, yad hagedolah”, and the other is called “the strong hand, yad hachazakah”. “The great hand” represents (G-d’s) aspect of kindness and goodness; “the strong hand” represents His strength, which He repays the wicked according to their wickedness. In removing Bnei Yisrael from Egypt, Hashem stretched out “the strong hand” and struck His enemies with ten plagues. For this reason G-d said that tefillin, which contain the written remembrance (of these events), should be placed on our weak hand (our left hand), which represents “the strong hand” that removed us from Egypt. This is why the pasuk here says, “for with the strength of a hand.” This is correct. Granted that it says in many places (regarding punishment), “the great hand,” in those instances G-d’s attribute of mercy concurred with the attribute of justice, but the essence of justice is still performed through the “strong hand.” {Ed. Note - Thus, despite the term “strong,” the “strong hand” which represents justice is, in fact, weaker than the “great hand” which represents mercy. To symbolize the vengeance that G-d exacted from Egypt through His “weaker hand,” we don our tefillin, which memorialize these events, on our weaker hand.}

.והיה לאות על ידכה, “it shall be as a symbol on your hand;” the phylactery to be worn on the arm (hand) is to serve as a symbol for the “strong hand,” with which G-d compelled the Egyptians to release the Israelites, as mentioned in the previous verse; the phylactery to be worn on the forehead however, is to be a reminder of the miracles G-d had performed as stated in Deuteronomy 6,22: ויתן ה' אותות ומופתים גדולים ורעים בפרעה ובמצרים לעינינו, “the Lord performed signs and miracles great and awesome before our eyes against Pharaoh and the Egyptians.” ידכה, the unusual spelling instead of ידך alerts us to the need to wear the phylactery on the left arm, our weaker arm. Seeing that we use our right arm for all manner of activities, it is not fitting that the holy name of G-d be attached to it. An alternate explanation: our sages have stated that seeing that the right arm and hand are used to attach the phylactery to our left arm, instead of vice versa, and in most instances the left arm or hand are called יד, there is nothing surprising in this. ולטוטפות, the word means: “something to look at.” We find in this context in Deuteronomy 28,10: וראו כל עמי הארץ כי שם ה' נקרא עלדך, “and all the nations of the earth will see that the name of the Lord) has been proclaimed upon you.” (Compare Talmud megillah 14 מטייפין)

והיה לאות על ידכה, “it shall be a sign on your hand.” According to the plain meaning of the text the letter ה which the Torah appended here at the end of the word ידכה is an allusion to the five “houses,” capsules, in which the respective scriptural verses in the phylacteries are “housed.” [the phylacteries worn on the head have four such housings, the ones worn on the arm has one]. The phylacteries worn on the arm are called אות, sign, as the Torah wrote “it shall be a sign for you on your hand” (verse 9), whereas the phylacteries worn on the head are called זכרון, “remembrance,” as we know from the same verse. You should appreciate that something which is described as אות is meant to be remembered on an ongoing basis, hence the description of זכרון as well as the description אות for describing the phylacteries and their purpose. This is why our sages (Menachot 36) ruled that one is to put on the phylacteries of the hand before the phylacteries of the head so that the אות will become a זכרון. We follow the sequence in which these two phylacteries are mentioned in the Torah. ולטוטפת בין עיניך, “and as ornaments between your eyes.” When removing the phylacteries they are removed in the reverse order of how they were put on. If one were to first take off the phylacteries of his arm just as he had put them on first, how could the phylacteries on the head still serve as זכרון seeing we have explained that there could not be a זכרון unless there was an אות which the זכרון would commemorate? This is why the אות aspect of the phylacteries must be both first and last. Our sages in Menachot 36 explained it as follows: “when removing the phylacteries the one on the head must be removed first as the Torah speaks of והיו לטוטפת בין עיניך, they shall be as ornaments between your eyes. As long as they are between your eyes, i.e. plural, two, they are ornaments. As long as the phylacteries of the head are between your eyes the phylacteries are an ornament. Leaving them all by themselves deprives them of being fit to be described as “ornaments.” A Midrashic approach (based on Menachot 37): the letter ה at the end of the word ידכה means that the phylacteries are to worn on the “weaker” hand [a play on words יד כהה, “the weak hand”], the left arm. Generally speaking a man’s left arm is not as strong as his right arm. A Kabbalistic approach: The additional letter ה at the end of the word ידכה was “borrowed” from the tetragram, i.e. from the last letter ה in the name י-ה-ו-ה. It symbolizes the attribute of Justice as practiced in the terrestrial world. It is the type of wisdom given to Solomon [who asked to be a competent judge for the people of Israel] in the dream when G’d allowed him to make a wish (Kings I 3,9). He spoke of his wish to possess a לב שומע, “a heart which is able to listen.” This is the reason that the phylacteries of the arm are to be worn on the left arm, the arm closest to the heart. The attribute which Solomon wished for is also known as כלה. The text of the phylacteries of the hand is written on a single roll of parchment and has a single housing, as opposed to the four “housings” of the phylacteries on the head. There is a mystical dimension to this in Song of Songs 4,9 where the same Solomon describes this attribute as אחתי כלה, usually translated as “my own, my bride.” The closeness to the point of a shared identity between Israel (Solomon) and the attribute of wisdom is alluded to by the word כלה as כלולה ב'לב, “included in the 32 paths of בינה, the ways to acquire wisdom.” [the oldest kabbalistic text, the ספר היצירה, is based on this concept. Ed.] The attribute כלה granted to Solomon enables the student to make a useful combination of these 32 paths of understanding, insight. In order to teach that this letter ה at the end of the word ידכה has symbolic significance, the paragraph והיה כי יביאך contains five letters ה each of which is equipped with a תג, [a crown on top of a letter, usually reserved for the letters ש ע ט נ ז ג ץ You will not find these תגים on the corresponding letters in the Torah scroll. They are written only in the parchment which is part of the phylacteries of the hand. Ed.] The respective letters with these “crowns” are: the ה in ונתנה לך; the two letters ה in הקשה, the ה in ויהרוג, and the ה in ידכה. All of the words in question which have this ”decorated” letter ה are references to G’d’s attribute of Justice. Having put on the phylacteries on the arm, one proceeds to put on the phylacteries of the head. The phylactery of the head is divided into four housings closely stuck together and containing the four paragraphs of the Torah in which the subject of phylacteries is mentioned in separate housings, each on its own parchment. They are in the sequence: 1) קדש לי כל בכור, 2) והיה כי יביאך, 3) שמע, 4) והיה אם שמוע. The paragraph קדש לי כל בכור corresponds to the emanation (attribute) חכמה, which is also known as ראשית, i.e. ראשית חכמה יראת ה' (Psalms 111). The word קדש, “sanctify” is a clear allusion to this. We have other verses containing the word קדש which are always understood as a reference to his attribute of חכמה. The second paragraph והיה כי יביאך, which deals with the Exodus is understood to refer to the attribute בינה, The attributes חכמה,בינה,גדולה,גבורה were prominently involved in the Exodus and are therefore represented in the phylacteries. This is reflected also in the four-armed letter ש [as opposed to the usual three-armed ש. Ed.] which is embossed on the housing of the phylactery of the head. The emanation (attribute) תפארת is represented by the phylacteries themselves rather than by the Torah sections written inside them. All this is part of the mystical dimension of what the Talmud says in Berachot 6 that “G’d Himself puts on phylacteries.” The emanations (attributes) נצח והוד are represented by the respective “heads” of the letter שין which is embossed on the phylactery of the head. The three “extremities” רישי'ן i.e. ראשין (upper ends of the letter ש), symbolise the three emanations נצח הוד יסוד. (in the usual three-armed ש). The additional arm and its head is considered the קשר, the “connection“ to the lowest emanation מלכות which links the emanations (attributes) to the terrestrial world the one known as אחרונה, “the last one, the hindmost one. This is also the mystical dimension of G’d saying to Moses (Exodus 33,23) וראית את אחורי “you will only see the hindmost aspect of Me.” What G’d did show Moses was the קשר של תפילין, the “knot, tie” of the phylacteries, i.e. the point at which G’d the transcendent becomes immanent, i.e. manifest, in the terrestrial part of His universe. (Berachot 7). Seeing that the straps of the phylacteries surround the head of the wearer this is perceived as an allusion to the continuous link between the manifest part of G’d’s largesse all the way to that point of the קשר. In view of the fact that the straps at the same time extend down to the level of one’s navel, it is an allusion to the fact that at the other end these emanations extend till the קו האמצעי, emanation תפארת, the central emanation (dividing line between what is perceived on the left and what is perceived on the right of the diagram of these 10 emanations) Seeing that these straps have to be black, a decree dating back to Moses for which we have not been told a reason, this is proof of the profound mystical meaning concealed within the whole commandment of the phylacteries and its details. The reason the second phylactery has to be placed on the head is that this is the seat of the power of the soul. Whatever has been written inside the phylactery on the head has also been written inside the phylactery of the hand, except that it has been written on a single piece of parchment and in an undivided housing. This is to teach that the lowest emanation מלכות, also known as אחרונה, is contained within it, and that it on the other hand contains all the higher attributes (emanations). The קשר, i.e. the shape of the knot in the strap symbolizes the צדיק; the reason it is worn on the left arm is that in that way it is opposite the right side of G’d whom we are to face at all times. You must appreciate that the commandment of phylacteries are really two separate commandments though they (both) are part of the same syndrome. The proof that they are two commandments lies in the fact that they are not interdependent as are for instance the ארבעה מינים, the four plants on Tabernacles. When the Etrog is missing for instance, one cannot recite a benediction over the remaining 3 plants and vice versa. In the case of the phylacteries, however, absence of either the phylactery of the head or the phylactery of the arm does not prevent one from putting on the other (Menachot 38) and reciting a benediction over performance of the commandment. Moreover, seeing that both phylacteries represent the same idea, one must not engage in conversation between putting on the one and the other. This is what is meant in Sotah 44 that if one engages in conversation between putting on one phylactery and the other, this rates as the kind of sin on account of which a soldier is sent home rather than participating in an expansionist war [to protect him from the angel of death who is always around in places of danger waiting to pounce on the guilty. Ed.] Seeing that both phylacteries represent the same idea it would have been logical to assume that halachah would treat them as interdependent on one another just as they do the Lulav and the Etrog. The fact that nonetheless they are treated differently halachically has been explained in terms of the Talmud Berachot saying that G’d Himself puts on phylacteries. The source of this statement is explained in the Sefer Habahir of Rabbi Nechunyah ben HaKanah in the form of a parable. The matter is compared to a king who owns a precious ornament which he sometimes wears on his head and on other occasions he wears it on his arm. This is the reason that the two phylacteries cannot be treated as if they were interdependent since we try to emulate G’d and how He treats His phylacteries. You may also conclude from the above that putting on the phylactery on the left arm is an allusion to the attribute of Justice which receives its input from the left. In this respect there is a parallel with the Etrog which is also held in the left hand. On the other hand, I have seen an opinion expressed by a prominent Kabbalist according to which the holding of the Etrog in the left hand and the putting on of the phylactery on the left arm cannot be compared. He claims that the fact that the Etrog is held in the left hand is because the left hand is appropriate for this seeing that the right hand holds the other three plants which have been tied together. The reason the phylactery of the hand is worn on the left arm, however, is in order for it to be opposite the right side of G’d. It has been said of G’d מימינו אש דת למו, “with His right hand He presented the fiery Torah to them.” (Deut. 33,2). The scholar in question quotes as further support for his view Psalms 45,10: ”the consort stands on your right hand decked in gold of Ophir.” You will note that the phylactery of the head contains G’d’s name 21 times so that between the two phylacteries G’d’s name appears 42 times corresponding to the 42-lettered name of G’d. Some people, examining the subject of the phylacteries still further, believe that just as the Shechinah is portrayed as resting on the four animals based on two cherubs depicted in Ezekiel’s visions in Ezekiel chapter 1 and chapter 10, so the phylacteries are a symbol of the Shechinah resting on the Israelites who put on the phylacteries which contain four sections of the Torah on its two major organs (heart and brain). The brain and the heart are perceived as flanking such a person from two opposite sides, as we read in Exodus 25,19 (in connection with the lid of the Holy Ark) כרוב אחד מקצה מזה וכרוב אחד מקצה מזה, “one cherub at one extreme and one cherub at the end from the other extreme.” Our sages (Menachot 43) say that whoever has phylacteries on his head, on his arm and fringes, ציצית, on his garment can be certain that he will not commit a sin (major one) as we have been assured in Kohelet 4,12 that “the threefold thread will not easily be severed.” Rabbi Shimon ben Levi in Menachot 44 states that anyone who regularly wears phylacteries will live long as we have a verse (Isaiah 38,16). Those who have the name א-ד-נ-י on them (on their bodies) and whose insides are filled with that spirit ‘You will add more life to me.’”

“And it shall be a sign upon your hand.” The Rabbis of blessed memory said (Menachot 37) yad kehah [weak hand] to indicate that phylacteries [tefillin] are placed on the left hand. The reason for this is that the intellect and the physical body are adversaries to each other — when one rises, the other falls. When the body is afflicted, the intellectual power increases. The purpose of the affliction in Egypt was to bring the physical nature of Israel into the iron furnace, and through this to strengthen and elevate the intellect. Elders and youths can testify to this, for when a person is young and unrefined with bodily strength at its peak, their intellectual power is weak. But as one advances in age and physical strength diminishes, their intellect grows stronger. Therefore, one who says that the former days were better than these does not ask wisely about these matters, for wisdom is found in the elderly, and understanding comes with length of days. And so it is with the two hands of a person, for the left hand which is weak and dim corresponds to the heart where wisdom resides, because the intellectual area in the heart causes the hand to be dim, as the hand is busy with physical activities. But the right hand is in the place of the liver, where the seat of desire dwells, and it does not oppose the hand because there is its main strength. However, in the place where the intellect resides, there the hand is dim. And when it says here And it shall be for a sign upon your hand, it is as if it said that it shall be a sign upon your heart, because the heart is the reason for the dimness of the hand. For the purpose of the tefillin is to serve as a reminder for a person in the place where the intellect resides in the brain and in the heart. And regarding the head tefillin, it says they should be between your eyes, because “the eye and the heart are the two agents of sin” (Jerusalem Talmud, Berakhot 1:5). Therefore, these two places need something that reminds them of the existence of God and His capabilities, and through this they will return from iniquity. Another explanation: He mentioned a weak hand to indicate that a man does not prevail by strength, but rather war belongs to God. This is because the hand of man is weak and feeble from accomplishing great or small things unless the hand of God has done this, strengthening his hand. As it is written, I have set the Lord before me constantly, etc. (Psalms 16:8). For initially, David was distressed about the placement of the heart on the left side and the liver on the right side, as if it were God’s will that the power of desire should be primary while the intellect in the heart secondary, just as the right hand is primary and the left is secondary. But afterward he said, I have set the Lord before me constantly, and then my left hand is opposite God’s right, and in this I am confident that I shall not falter from my right — that the power of desire on the right will not cause me to stumble from the straight path. This is because God’s right hand is exalted to give strength and power to the intellectual heart that is opposite it when I face toward God. Therefore, my heart rejoiced upon seeing that God supports my hand. This is what he concludes by saying, There are pleasures at Your right hand forever — implying not at my right hand, because everything depends on God’s right hand, as it is opposite my weak hand. Therefore, God commanded to place the tefillin, in which God’s name is inscribed, on the weak hand, to indicate that God’s strong right hand is what gives strength to this weak hand. This is what is meant by with a strong hand the Lord brought us out of Egypt — meaning God’s strong right hand, which is opposite man’s left hand, and with it the Lord brought us out. When I face toward God, then His right is opposite the weak hand. This was given to teach them that no deed depends on human action, but rather on the help of the blessed God. And as for what is stated, “And it shall be for you as a sign upon your hand.” And regarding the head [tefillin], it does not mention “for you” because they are a sign also for others, as it is said Then all the peoples of the earth shall see that the name of the Lord is proclaimed over you, and they shall stand in fear of you (Deuteronomy 28:10). And the Master said, “These are the tefillin of the head” (Berakhot 6a). And as for why we put on the hand [tefillin] first and afterward the head [tefillin], and when removing them we remove the head [tefillin] first, it is because there are three agents of transgression: the eye sees, the heart desires, and the instruments of action complete [the sin] (Rashi on Numbers 15:39). And if so, with the hand [tefillin] most [of these agents] are there, because there is the heart and the hand, and therefore that place needs more protection from sin than the head [tefillin]. Therefore, one should first rectify that place, and likewise in removal, they should remain on the hand continuously.

And it came to pass, when Pharaoh sent out the people, that Hashem did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, although it was near; for Hashem said: "Lest the people be dismayed when they see war and return to Egypt."

ויהי בשלח פרעה... ולא נחם AND IT CAME TO PASS WHEN PHARAOH HAD SENT [THE PEOPLE AWAY] THAT GOD GUIDED THEM NOT — The word נחם means He guided them, just as, (Exodus 32:34) “Go, guide (נחה) the people”, and (Proverbs 6:22) “when thou goest it shall guide (תנחה) thee”. כי קרוב הוא BECAUSE IT WAS NEAR, and it would therefore be easy to return by the same route to Egypt. — Of Midrashic explanations there are many (cf. Mekhilta). בראתם מלחמה WHEN THEY SEE WAR — For instance the war mentioned in (Numbers 14:45) “Then the Amalekites and the Canaanites came down etc.” If they had proceeded by the direct route they would have then turned back. This is evident, for what would have been the case? If, when He led them about by a circuitous way, they said, (Numbers 14:4) “Let us appoint another chief and go back to Egypt”, had He led them by a direct route how much the more certainly would they have spoken so. פן ינחם PERADVENTURE [THE PEOPLE] REPENT — peradventure they cherish a different thought (they change their mind) about having gone out and set their hearts on returning (cf. Rashi on Genesis 6:6).

AND G-D LED THEM NOT BY THE WAY OF THE LAND OF THE PHILISTINES BECAUSE IT WAS NEAR. “It would therefore be easy [for the Israelites] to return to Egypt by the same route. There are many Midrashic explanations, [but the above is the plain sense of Scripture].” Thus the language of Rashi. This is also the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who explained the purport of the verse to be that G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines “because” it was near. They might therefore be filled with regret [when they experience war], and they would immediately return to Egypt. In my opinion, if their explanations were correct, the expression for G-d said would have been mentioned in first place in the verse, in which case the verse would read: “and G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines, for G-d said, Because it is near, lest peradventure the people repent!” But the correct interpretation is that [the expression in question does not state the reason for G-d’s choice but merely] states that G-d led them not by the way of the land of the Philistines although it was near and it would have been advantageous to lead them by that route, for G-d said: Lest peradventure the people repent when they see war, and they return to Egypt. The reason they would experience war if they went by the way of the land of the Philistines, is that the Philistines would surely not have given them permission to go peacefully through their land, and thus they might return to Egypt. But by the way of the wilderness, they would not see war until they came to the lands of Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites, which were given to them [i.e. to Israel]. At that time, they were already far from Egypt, [and there was thus no reason to fear that they would be tempted to return to Egypt because of war]. The war of Amalek in Rephidim was no reason for the Israelites to return to Egypt, since they did not pass through the land of the Amalekites. Rather, Amalek came from his country and warred against them because of his hatred of Israel. Even if they were to take their own course to return to Egypt, it would be to no avail since Amalek would fight them on the way. Besides, they were already far from Egypt because of the circuitous route which they had followed, and they knew of no other route. Now Rashi commented: “When they see war. For instance, the war of the Canaanite and the Amalekite. If they had proceeded by the direct route, they would have then turned back. For after He had made them go round by a circuitous way they said, Let us make a captain and go back to Egypt, and how much more so would they have said it had He led them by a straight road!”The purport of that which Scripture states, and G-d led them not… But G-d led the people about, by the way of the wilderness, is that when they journeyed from Succoth, a pillar of cloud began to go before them. It did not go by the way of the land of the Philistines but instead went by the way of the wilde...

"And He led them around" — the entire section concerning Pharaoh in the parashah Beshalach is addressed by the verse, "Does a willful rebel against his Maker prosper? When he is at ease, does an arrow pierce his liver? Look at the wayward one and take it to heart." The vav of "ve-lo nacham" is like a peh rafe in Arabic. It is well known that from Egypt to Jerusalem via the Philistine road is not a great distance — it is approximately ten days' journey by the direct route. Were it otherwise, how would the brothers have come with their donkeys to Egypt? If the road were very far, what would have sufficed for them and their donkeys to eat, and on their return they were bringing grain home? "For it is near" — R. Moses said: even though it is near. And comparable to this, in my opinion: "for it is a stiff-necked people" (below, 34:9); "heal my soul, for I have sinned against You" (Ps. 41:5); "for he has iron chariots" (Josh. 17:18). In my opinion there is no need for this interpretation, for the meaning is: why did God not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines — because it is near? He led them by a long way, so that they would not see war and say, "let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt." We know that Hashem knows future events without doubt, and He knew they would reconsider if He led them by way of the Philistine land. Yet the Torah spoke in the manner of human beings, so that those who study it will understand.

ויהי בשלח...ולא נחם אלוקים דרך ארץ פלשתים, even though it had been G’d’s plan to lead the Israelites to Mount Sinai to receive the Torah there, and only from there to the land of Israel, as He stated Himself in Exodus 6,7-8 :”I will take you as My people, and I will bring you to the land, etc.,” at this point, G’d’s plan was to lead them to the Sea of Reeds, which was neither the route to the land of the Philistines, nor the route that led to Mount Sinai. [we must remember that Moses had stood at Chorev=Mt Sinai at the burning bush and he did not have to cross the sea to do this. Ed.] The major reason for this was to bring about the drowning of Pharaoh and his army in the sea. [it is important to always remember that due to man’s free will, G’d cannot deal with man in the way He deals with inert objects or even animals, none of which could oppose Him. G’d needs to create a scenario which gives man a chance to delude himself, thus bringing him to act in a manner enabling G’d to insure that His design will be carried out. Ed.] An example of G’d acting in this manner is described in Judges 4,7 where G’d Himself speaks about how He “dragged” Sisera and his army and 900 armoured vehicles across the river Kishon to face Barak. The simplest route to get to the Sea of Reeds was by traversing the land of the Philistines. דרך ארץ פלשתים, G’d did not want them to travel this route כי קרוב הוא because this route was too close to Egypt, afforded too easy a way to return to Egypt. Also, seeing it was a much traveled route, too many travelers would be able to report to Pharaoh about the Israelites and also too many Egyptians could keep the Israelites informed of what transpired in their country. If the Israelites would have to face combat בראותם מלחמה, when they would hear that the Egyptians were mobilizing for war preparatory to chasing after the Israelites, the latter would no doubt return to Egypt out of fear of being killed. This is why G’d decided to lead them on a route not frequented by travelers at all.

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם, It happened when Pharaoh discharged the people, etc. Why does the Torah employ the word ויהי which always indicates some painful experience? The Torah should have described the Exodus in glowing terms! Besides, why does the Torah attribute the Exodus to Pharaoh rather than to G'd? After all, He took us out of Egypt, something the Torah does not tire of mentioning on numerous occasions! The word ויהי may be justified in view of the pursuit by Pharaoh and the resulting fear the Israelites were to experience shortly. The Torah hints that the reason such a pursuit occurred was because Pharaoh had a hand in the Exodus, i.e. G'd had waited till Pharaoh himself had been willing to liberate the Jews. If it had all been G'd's doing such a pursuit would not have occurred. As soon as the Jews departed Pharaoh schemed to find a justification to pursue them and to convince his people that the attempt to bring the Israelites back would be worthwhile. We will explain later Pharaoh's reasoning in greater detail. All Pharaoh's scheming constituted something negative for the Israelites. It was far from a foregone conclusion that G'd would simply kill the Egyptians. We know from Megillah 10 that G'd is greatly concerned when the necessity arises to destroy His creatures. We do not recite the whole of Hallel on the seventh day of Passover when G'd eliminated the last of our Egyptian enemies because "when G'd's creatures drown in the sea it is no cause for rejoicing." Pharaoh had deluded himself that it was up to him to decide whether or not to allow the Israelites to depart. If so, he could just as easily renege as he had done during the course of his protracted encounters with Moses and Aaron. Israel had ample reason to be concerned about such an eventuality. For all these reasons the introductory ויהי is more than justified. In fact the conjunctive letter ו at the beginning of the words ולא נחם, indicates that Israel had additional reasons to be concerned of negative developments on the horizon. Another detail to watch in our verse is the word עם. The Zohar second part, page 45 states that whenever Israel is described as עם it is an allusion to the mixed multitude of converts that joined the Israelites at the Exodus. In our portion you will find the Israelites are variously described as בני ישראל and as העם. For instance, in the next verse already the departing Israelites are referred to as בני ישראל. Apparently G'd wanted to make certain that we realised that the people described as העם were not natural born Jews. Our sages in Shemot Rabbah 42,6 consider Israel's corruption in the desert as inspired by these converts. They were the ones who wanted to appoint a new leader to take them back to Egypt (Numbers 14,4). They were also the ones who said: "make a god for us who will walk before us, etc." (Exodus 32,1). All this is alluded to in the word ויהי at the beginning of our paragraph. מ The meaning of the words בשלח פרעה את העם is that whe...

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם, “It was when Pharaoh had let the people go;” the reason why the Torah did not write that “Pharaoh let the Israelites go,” is because the word העם included fellow travelers who had joined the Jewish nation, as well as spies who would report back to Pharaoh on the route they had taken. ולא נחם אלו־הים, ”and G-d had not led them, etc.” G-d did not lead them on the shortest route that led to the land of Canaan; the letter ו in the word ולא is superfluous (if that was all this meant) דרך ארץ פלשתים כי קרוב הוא, “the route which runs through the land of the Philistines; although (or because), it was the shortest route.” According to our author what is meant is “although,” despite, the fact that it was the shortest route. We find a similar meaning for the word כי in Exodus 19,5: כי לי כל הארץ, “although the whole earth belongs to Me.” Another example of this meaning of the word כי is found in Psalms 41,5, “heal me although I have sinned against You.” רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך. Consider also Genesis 48,14: שכל ידיו כי מנשה הבכור, “he crossed his hands although Menashe was the firstborn.” In our context, although there was an additional boundary to be crossed between Egypt and the land of Canaan, namely the land of the Philistines, as we know from when while in the land of the Philistines G-d had commanded Yitzchok not to continue on to Egypt on account of the famine in the land of Canaan, (Genesis 26,1) so that it seemed strange that G-d did not lead the Israelites by this route, He was afraid that if they would find resistance to their traversing that land, they would refer to return to Egypt. כי אמר אלוקים פן ינחם העם, “for G-d had said: “lest the people have remorse;” we must not criticize this verse by saying that it cannot be reconciled with G-d’s Omniscience, i.e. that He did know all this in advance; besides, surely if G-d had wanted to He could have led the Israelites through the land of the Philistines without their coming to any harm; however, what is written here is an answer to the attribute of Justice which wanted to exploit that opportunity to accuse the Israelites of lack of faith in their G-d. Precisely, because G-d was aware that the Israelites were not yet in a condition to withstand the Satan, He decided not to give them that opportunity at this time. We find an example of a similar situation in Genesis 3,22 where G-d is portrayed as being “afraid” that Adam and Eve after having eaten from the tree of knowledge and having forfeited immortality might eat from the tree of life in order to regain it, and to thereby nullify the penalty G-d had imposed upon them. The Torah, justifying G-d’s expelling them from the garden, wrote there: ועתה פן ישלח ידו, “and now, lest he will extend his hand, etc.” There too you could have asked: “seeing that G-d knew what would happen, why did He not remove the tree, instead of depriving mankind of access to the garden?” בראותם מלחמה “when they would see they would be involved in war;” The Philistines would attack them, thinking that the Israelites were approaching in order avenge the 30000 men of Ephrayim they had killed 30 years previously when these people having miscalculated the time when their redemption was due had taken matters into their own hands and had marched out of Egypt in order to recapture their homeland. Their miscalculation had been that they thought the 400 years mentioned at the covenant of the pieces in Genesis 15,13 had commenced then and not at the birth of Yitzchok. Actually, the 430 years mentioned in Exodus 12,40 had commenced then, (although Rash’bam has trouble accounting for this). According to Yonatan ben Uzziel this may have been what Pharaoh had counted on. A grandson of Avimelch attacked the members of Ephrayim. According to Chronicles I 7,20, the battle with the Philistines occurred at Gat. According to some scholars the members of the tribe of Ephrayim killed during that battle were the “dried bones” resurrected by the prophet Ezekiel, (Ezekiel 37) כי קרוב הוא, “for he was very close to him;” according to some scholars Pharaoh and Avimelech of the Philistines were politically very close to one another, and Pharaoh counted on the Philistines to bring the Israelites back to him. He also counted on the promise of Avraham to Avimelech valid for 4 generations hence not to engage in hostilities against him. Actually, a grandson of the Avimelech with whom Avraham, had concluded a non aggression pact, a pact that his son Yitzchok had renewed, was still alive when the Israelites left Egypt. Avraham’s descendants did not engage in warfare with the Philistines for seven generations. (Moses was the seventh generation from Avraham). All these considerations prompted G-d not to lead the Israelites on the shortest route to the Holy Land. [Besides, if G-d meant for them to receive the Torah at Mount Sinai, this would have been quite impossible, and G-d had told Moses already at the burning bush that one of the reasons why He redeemed them earlier than expected was that they would receive the Torah at that site. Ed.] Our author also quotes the liturgist who in his poem makes reference to these points. For all the reasons quoted, G-d ensured that the Israelites did not take the route that had proven so tragic for the members of the tribe of Ephrayim some thirty years earlier. בראותם מלחמה, “when they come face to face with war.” This would have been a war on two fronts, the pursuing Egyptians at their back and the furious Philistines facing them, trying to force them back to their allies the Egyptians. Our author had explained already on Genesis 21,22 where the fact that the barren Sarah had given birth to a son for Avraham, that the prophecies given to him started to be taken seriously by the rulers of that time. Up until then they had not worried about these prophecies. In Joshua 13,3, we read about the Israelites indeed having had to face enemies on two fronts when Joshua had aged and not yet conquered all of the land of Canaan as he had been instructed to do. ושבו מצרימה. “and they will prefer to return to Egypt.” That this was a logical consideration is born out by the fact that the Israelites, even though not having taken that route, were on the point of voluntarily returning to Egypt on numerous occasions, on most occasions when they faced problems in the desert.

'מצרף לכסף וכור לזהב ובוחן לבות ה', “the crucible is for silver, the furnace for gold, but G’d examines the hearts.” (Proverbs 17,3) In this verse Solomon warns man to refine his thoughts and to improve his character traits. Seeing that the heart is the most important one of our organs and all other organs depend on it and it is situated at the center of the body, it governs the other parts of the body, guides them and inspires them with its energy. All other organs of the body are subservient to the heart. Symbolically speaking, the heart is comparable to the king of a country who resides in its center, supervises all the more peripheral parts of the country, and who issues decrees telling his subjects how to conduct themselves. Seeing that all other organs depend on the heart for their continued existence, G’d, who is the source of life to all His creatures is also referred to as “heart.” This is the meaning of Psalms 73,26: “the Rock of my heart and the Lord is forever my portion.” Just as the human heart exercises its power and influence on other organs of the body so G’d exerts influence on all parts of His universe to the farthest corners of it. This is confirmed in Exodus 8,18: “for I the Lord am active in the midst of the earth.” Similarly, the most important element in relating to Torah and how one observes it is the heart. The entire written Torah is bracketed between the letters of the word לב, heart, i.e. between the letter in ב-ראשית at the beginning and the letter ל in ישרא-ל at the end. This symbolizes that the Torah itself was taken from the attribute (emanation) חכמה which has לב, 32 paths, (as we pointed out earlier in our discussion of the symbolisms of the phylacteries). Seeing that all man’s actions are so inextricably intertwined with the heart, Solomon warns that the character traits of the heart are of the utmost importance and he warns that all the thoughts man considers as private, i.e. secrets of his heart, are in fact known to G’d as if they were public, seeing that He examines every heart to determine whose heart is good and whose is not. This then is the meaning of the verse we quoted at the beginning of our commentary. Just as the silversmith and the goldsmith must examine the purity of the silver and gold he works with and wants to fashion into jewelry by using the tools used by the jeweler to refine silver and gold respectively, so G’d employs His own tools to examine the purity of man’s hearts. In language familiar to the silversmith and goldsmith these tools are known as crucible and furnace respectively. We learn from this verse that when the heart is good it is comparable to pure silver or pure gold. Eventually, such a good heart will result in the owner performing good deeds. Conversely, if the heart is defective, the owner will commit sins sooner or later just as impure silver will not stand up for long when put to the use for which it had been intended. The expression בוחן לבות, “He examines hearts,” also includes a reference by Solomon to the day of judgment on which G’d decides who is to participate in the resurrection. Solomon speaks of people who fall into the category of בינונים, being neither wicked nor righteous; their merits and debits are in balance and G’d needs to find if such people, or their souls had been guilty of severe sins which would preclude them from participating in a future life on earth. If, during their life on earth, these people had not committed heretical sins involving their bodies such as deliberately failing to put on phylacteries, they will be inscribed as צדיקים גמורים, perfectly righteous people whose participation in eternal life is assured, seeing we accept the view of the school of Hillel (Rosh Hashanah 17). That school interpreted the words ורב חסד in Exodus 34,6 to mean that when engaged in judging, G’d has a tendency, an inclination, to find according to the principles of the attribute of Mercy. If however, amongst the sins of such a בינוני there are heretical sins committed with his body, it is impossible for such a soul to escape at least a temporary abode in gehinom, in purgatory, even according to the lenient view taken by the school of Hillel. The crucibles and furnaces mentioned by Solomon are the period in gehinom during which such souls are being cleansed of the stains on their souls. The word כור is a reference to the fires of Hades, the instrument which removes all dross. Proof that Solomon speaks of the בינונים, the people whose sins and merits were in balance, is the expression בוחן, “examines.” The righteous and the wicked do not need such an examination; G’d knows immediately which category they belong to. The former qualified for immediate eternal life whereas the latter have already forfeited it. Another concept which is included in Solomon’s description of בוחן לבות, is that G’d makes such hearts submit to tests. Not only does He not examine them for His own benefit, but He subjects them to tests to demonstrate to their peers that these people deserve the fate that awaits them. If such people are found worthy of an hereafter the fact has to be demonstrated to their peers. The scriptural verse relating to this is Zecharyah 13,9: “and I will smelt them as one smelts silver and test them as one tests gold.” it is well known that G’d only tests the righteous as David said in Psalms 11,5: “the Lord seeks out the righteous man to test him.” The matter can best be understood by a parable. A potter who sells his wares does not demonstrate the worth and quality of his inferior products but he demonstrates the quality of his finest products.” These tests and examinations are not needed to demonstrate anything to G’d Who know it all. He knows what goes on in the heart of each of His creatures. This is why Solomon speaks of G’d being an “Examiner of hearts.” He confirms this also in Proverbs 15,11: “Hell and destruction are in front of G‘d; how much more the hearts of men.” The logic of this verse is simple. If G’d can see what goes on within the bowels of the earth, how could He fail to be aware of what goes on in the hearts of men above the earth? After all the heart is the abode of G’d’s own soul, the part of man which has been emanated from the celestial regions! If, in spite of all these considerations, G’d does subject men to tests it can only be in order to demonstrate to other creatures who are unable to look into a person’s heart and can judge only by what their eyes behold. We know that man is limited in his perceptions to what his eyes behold from Samuel I 16,7: “man sees only what is visible, but the Lord sees into the heart.” Once the righteous has been tested and his potential goodness has become manifest so that he was able to translate pure thoughts and intentions into actions, such actions are a sanctification of the name of the Lord. This was the type of test G’d subjected Avraham to when the Torah wrote (Genesis 22,1) “and G’d tested Avraham.” The whole purpose of the test was to demonstrate the quality of Avraham’s service to G’d to those around him. When G’d said to Avraham at the conclusion of the test:: “for now I know that you are G’d-fearing, etc.,” the meaning is that “now G’d had been able to demonstrate to one and all how G’d-fearing Avraham was.” When the Jewish people left Egypt and G’d performed innumerable miracles for them in the desert, most of these miracles were designed to be tests. When G’d split the sea for them to enter into, He did not show them a path which led from one side to the other; rather He split the sea a little at a time, keeping them anxious all the time, wondering if G’d would continue to dry out that path until they came to the other bank. The Israelites saw the sea in front of them all the time they were traversing it. This is what David meant when he said (Psalms 114,3) “the sea saw and fled.” Something similar occurred with the manna. G’d never supplied more than enough for one day or one day plus the Sabbath (Exodus 16,4). Desert travelers would normally carry a supply of several weeks’ provisions with them. G’d acted as He did in order to instill the habit of faith in the people. The meaning of faith is to make oneself dependent on G’d’s largesse. He wanted to know if they were going to criticize His way of doing things. This is why when Pharaoh finally released the Israelites G’d made them travel through the desert. This was all designed to test if their hearts were pure, if they trusted G’d or felt they knew better than He what was good for them (Yuma 67). G’d could have let the people travel a closer route through civilized parts of the world, through the land of the Philistines, However, He wanted to strengthen their faith in Him through letting them travel through inhospitable country and looking after them. ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם ולא נחם אלוה-ים דרך ארץ פלשתים כי קרוב הוא, כי אמר אלוה-ים פן ינחם העם בראותם מלחמה ושבו מצרימה. “It was when Pharaoh sent off the Children of Israel that G’d did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although it was near, for G’d said: ‘perhaps the people will reconsider when they see war and return to Egypt.’” The words: “perhaps the people will reconsider” are hard to understand; do we not believe that there is no such thing as the word “perhaps” in G’d’s vocabulary? Does He not know all in advance? Clearly G’d knew for certain how the Israelites would react when they saw they had to fight the Philistines! The meaning of the words פן ינחם העם, therefore must be: “so that the people will not reconsider.” Indeed our sages (Eiruvin 96) are on record that wherever the expression פן or the word ואל, occurs in the Bible the meaning is “so that not.” Example: (Genesis 3,22) ועתה פן ישלח ידו ולקח גם מעץ החיים, “and now so that he will not also stretch out his hand and take from the tree of life, etc.” G’d meant it was not appropriate to give Adam an opportunity to take from the fruit of the tree of life and to nullify G’d’s decree that he had become mortal by eating from it. Similarly, here: G‘d led the people through the desert instead of through the land of the Philistines in order not to grant them an opportunity to regret having left Egypt. בראותם מלחמה, “when they would see warfare.” Even though they experienced warfare in the desert such as when the Amalekites attacked them a few weeks after the Exodus, the fight against Amalek did not evoke a desire to return to Egypt. After all, Israel had not been called upon by G’d to invade (or traverse) a neighbouring country, something they would have found hard to justify. [I suppose the peace-treaty between Avraham- Yitzchak- Avimelech was still in effect anyway. Ed.] The Amalekites had attacked them in No-man’s land without provocation. The Amalekites by definition were attacking G’d through attacking His people; they had heard about all the miracles G’d had performed for the Israelites when He struck down the Egyptians. They were not willing to allow the G’d of Israel to have a monopoly of power on this earth. We have a comment by the Midrash (Mechilta Beshalach Petichata [introduction]) that if, seeing that after the Israelites had taken a devious and difficult route through the desert they nevertheless said (Numbers 14,4) in the second year of their journey: “let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt,” imagine what would have happened if they would have had to confront the Philistines at the beginning of their journey on the way to the land of the Canaanites. Rabbeinu Chananel wrote that G’d had a different reason for leading the Israelites through the desert. He needed an excuse for demonstrating miracles for the people. Had G’d led the Jewish people by the most direct route and had influenced the Philistines to let them travel through their country unmolested, this would have been such a minor miracle that it would not have impressed the people with an appreciation of how G’d had exerted Himself on their behalf. G’d’s desire to demonstrate His power and ability to triumph over what appeared to be insurmountable difficulties made it necessary for Him to lead the people through an inhospitable desert. By leading the people through the desert G’d forced Himself to come up with the heavenly manna as the solution to their food problems, with the extraction of water from a rock and the traveling well as the solution to their water problems, with the pillar of cloud and the pillar of fire as the solution to problems of an inhospitable climate, etc., etc. The further the Israelites traveled from civilization the greater were the miracles required to keep them alive and well. It is characteristic of G’d’s השגחה פרטית, benevolent providence for the righteous, that He performs miracles within miracles. We find, for instance, that when Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah were thrown into a fiery furnace by Nebuchadnezzar because they refused to accept him as a deity and to bow before his golden image, G’d could have saved them by the simple expedient of extinguishing the fire in that furnace (Daniel 3,27). Instead, G’d’ troubled Himself not only to allow these men to walk around within that flaming kiln as if they and their garments were totally oblivious to the infernal heat, but He visibly increased the heat and the fire within that kiln; He showed Nebuchadnezzar a vision of three unbound men enjoying themselves within that flaming kiln totally unperturbed by what Nebuchadnezzar thought he had accomplished. Nebuchadnezzar was enabled to look through opaque thick walls, another miracle. When G’d saved Daniel from the den of lions (Daniel 6,23), He also could have done so by means of lesser miracles such as simply killing the lions in that den. Instead, G’d chose to leave the lions alive but to prevent them from harming Daniel. In other words, the miracle within the miracle was that G’d interfered with the lions’ instincts in order to demonstrate His power. We find something similar in the Book of Judges when Gideon was commanded to fight the Midianites. Seeing that the Midianites were described as “as numerous as the sand of the sea,” (Judges 7,12) G’d could have allowed ten or twenty thousand men to fight them and their victory would surely have been credited to G’d seeing that even such a number of men would have been greatly outnumbered by their opponents. However, G’d chose to allow only three hundred men to go to war against Midian thus increasing the miracle and as a result His reputation. The prophet states that G’d wanted to ensure that no Israelite would be able to take credit for the victory (Judges 7,2). Actually, in response to the call that the faint-hearted Israelites should return home, ten thousand remained after twenty-two thousand had departed. G’d told Gideon specifically that the remaining ten thousand men were still far too numerous to fight against Midian! (7,4). They were to be tested by the manner in which they would lap up water to drink from a pond or river. The people who lapped up water like a dog were chosen as soldiers in G’d’s army, whereas those that drank like human beings, i.e. bringing the water to their mouths instead were sent home! (7,7). This was characteristic of the way G’d dealt with the Israelites in the desert. They were to be raised gradually to a level of trust and faith in G’d so that they would be ready to receive the Torah. This is why G’d parted the waters of the Sea of Reeds only a little at a time. This is why even at Marah where G’d had showed Moses how to make sweet water which had become bitter sweet again, G’d went to the trouble of first miraculously making that water bitter and then performing a second miracle all in order to teach the Israelites a lesson in faith (compare Mechilta Parshah 1 on Exodus 15,22, opinion of Rabbi Joshua). G’d followed the same principle when making a daily miracle in raining down manna from the heaven when He could have contented Himself with the performance of such a miracle once a week or even once a month. When the Israelites had still questioned G’d’s providence even after the miracle at Marah, the attack by Amalek which followed promptly was also a miracle designed to teach the Israelites the lesson that faith was needed to survive. [seeing the Israelites had been wrapped in the clouds of glory, it required a miracle for Amalek to locate them. Ed.] The lesson at that time was that failure to study Torah when one has the time leads to all kinds of disasters. Solomon refers to this need for faith in Proverbs 22,19 when he says: “so that you may put your trust in the Lord, I have instructed you today, even you.” Solomon is telling his readers that whatever they have read so far in his book is meant to be of help to them in strengthening this vital element of Judaism within them. By saying “you too,” he invites the reader to attain the same level of faith in G’d that he himself felt he had acquired. A Midrashic approach: The Torah in its opening words of this portion wants to remind us that the very mouth who had said: “I will not dismiss the Children of Israel,” and “I will certainly not let the children go with you,” was the same man who was forced at the end to beg them to leave his country. Nonetheless, G’d rewarded the Egyptians even for this reluctant utterance by their king when the Torah commanded the Jewish people (Deut. 23,8) “do not despise the Egyptian for you were a stranger in their land.” The same mouth which had said: “ G’d is the righteous one and I and my people are the sinners,” was rewarded by the Torah in being accorded a funeral, as we know from Exodus 15,12 נטית ימינך תבלעמו ארץ, “when You inclined Your right hand the earth swallowed him, “ [although they had been drowned in the sea. Ed.]

And it came to pass, when Pharaoh let the people go. And afterward it states, lest the people repent and God led the people around, and afterward it states, and the children of Israel went up armed. One must consider why they are called the people three times, and the fourth time they are called the children of Israel in connection with armed meaning weapons. And it seems that by virtue of being the children of Israel, they would not need weapons, and Pharaoh’s sending them away was because they were the children of Israel, so it should have been stated the opposite way. It seems appropriate to resolve this in two ways. The first is based on the conclusion in the Yalkut that they went up armed [chamushim] means they were armed with five [chamisha] weapons. But this raises a difficulty: Does Israel’s success in battle depend on an abundance of weapons? Is it not written Was a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel? (Judges 5:8). For the Holy One, blessed be He, is their shield, and Torah and prayer are the weapons of Israel, as it is said The two-edged sword is in their hands (Psalms 149:6) — two edges because both [Torah and prayer] depend on the mouth. If so, what glory is this for Israel that they went up armed, as if they did not trust in God, Heaven forbid? Even if we say that a person is obligated to act naturally to the best of their ability, and what nature lacks, the miracle will complete, it is still difficult to understand why the Scripture tells us that each one had five weapons — why do I need this number? Furthermore, did it happen by miracle or coincidence that each one had exactly five, no more and no less? Is this not a matter of significance? Additionally, it appears that the Israelites were not trained for war at all, as they were busy with hard labor all their days. What need did they have for these weapons when they had no experience with them? They should have gone with sticks and slingshots. Therefore it seems to explain. This comes to inform us that they had no weapons in their possession except for the five books of the Torah, which are divided into seven books according to the opinion that the passage of Vayehi Binsoa [Numbers 10:35–36] is a book unto itself. And this is what it means by chamushim [וחמשים] — meaning “armed” [mezuyanim, the letter, zayin, being the equivalent of seven] — it all alludes to the Torah. And it uses the term chamushim because the word relates to the meaning [wordplay], and similarly “mezuyanim,” because the words “chamisha” and “zayin” are names of war implements, but for Israel they also allude to the Torah. Or chamushim refers to the five books of the Torah as mentioned, and “mezuyanim” refers to prayer, as it is written Seven times a day I praise You (Psalms 119:164). And it is known that the Israelites were not worthy to receive the Torah except after they crossed the Red Sea and after they walked in the desert. For at the Red Sea they came to complete faith in God and in the prophecy of Moses His servant, as it is written: And they believed in God and in Moses His servant. And before they reached this level of faith, it is obvious that they were not worthy to receive the Torah as long as they doubted the prophecy of Moses and faith in God. And after they came to this faith at the Red Sea, from then on they were worthy to receive the Torah. But they still needed to walk through the desert, through an unsown land, to acquire there the trait of sufficiency [i.e., being content with little], for this is the way of Torah: Bread with salt shall you eat, etc. The Torah was given only to those who ate the manna (Mechilta Beshalach [Vayisa] 2), for from the descent of the manna they learned the way of sufficiency which those who receive the Torah need. In addition to this, their faith was further rooted through the miracles performed for them in the desert, like the miracles at the Red Sea. And it was given to instruct their hearts further that because for 2,000 years of void, the world was desolate like a desert all the time it was without Torah, therefore they needed to receive the Torah to complete what the world lacked. And before Israel received the Torah, they were included among the rest of the nations and were not yet distinguished in the perfection that is unique to them from the other nations. Therefore, they were not called by the name “Children of Israel” except through receiving the Torah; then God separated them from all the peoples to be His treasured people. And with this, the explanation of the verses will be in this manner: And it came to pass when Pharaoh let the people go — at the time of being sent forth, they were still called “the people” because they had not yet been distinguished from the other peoples of the land, as they did not have their weapons with them — neither natural weapons, for they were not trained in warfare, nor the weapon of Torah, for they had not yet received the Torah. They were not even ready to receive it as they were not yet rooted in faith. Therefore, God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although it was nearer, because God said, Lest the people change their minds when they see war, as they were still categorized with the rest of the peoples of the earth, and would necessarily return to Egypt. Since they had no weapons in their possession, it was obvious they would be defeated if they did not turn back. Therefore, God led the people around by way of the wilderness of the Red Sea, because through the miracles of the sea and wilderness, they would acquire complete faith and then be ready to receive the Torah. From that moment, it would be as if they had their weapons with them, as if they had already received the Torah, and they would then be called “the Children of Israel” to distinguish them from other nations. This is the meaning of and the Children of Israel went up armed [chamushim] — chamushim refers to being armed with the five [chamisha] weapons, namely the five books of the Torah and the seven books or seven prayers as mentioned. This agrees with what we find (Pesikta Rabbati 34:6) that at the giving of the Torah, the Holy One, blessed be He, girded them with weapons, etc. See also Ramban on the portion of Ki Tisa in the verse And now, put off your ornaments (Exodus 33:5), which is translated as “remove your weapons from you,” which is clear evidence that the Torah is the weapon of Israel. Although at the time of their ascent from Egypt they were not yet armed until they arrived at the wilderness, the verse still says and they went up armed, because as soon as they agreed to go to the wilderness and did not say “How shall we go to the wilderness, a place without seeds?” they immediately acquired faith. The beginning of this acquisition was considered as if they were already rooted in it, therefore it says and they went up armed, meaning at the time they went up from the land of Egypt to the wilderness. The completion of the acquisition of faith occurred at the Red Sea as stated. A second approach to resolve these verses, is that the people mentioned here refers to the lesser elements among Israel and the mixed multitude [erev rav], for they share the same designation. When it says And it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, it speaks of the mixed multitude, for since he did not prevent them from leaving, it is as if he sent them away. We find the language of “sending” used for one who allows another to go, as in Send me away to my master (Genesis 24:54) said by Eliezer, Abraham’s servant, and as in Jacob said to Laban, “Send me away” (Genesis 30:25). Similarly, the “sending” mentioned here refers to the mixed multitude, and it was because of them that it was necessary to lead them around so they would not return to Egypt when they saw war. But for the sake of the children of Israel alone, this circuitous route would not have been necessary, for the children of Israel went up armed [chamushim] — they were trustworthy children, sons of believers who trusted in God’s salvation, and this was their weaponry. Therefore, they were confident in battle. But all their lack of trust came from the mixed multitude, for it was near — meaning they had recently arrived and had not yet become rooted in faith.

ויהי בשלח פרעה....כי קרוב הוא, “It happened when Pharaoh had dismissed the people,… for it was near;” according to Rashi, the meaning of the words “for it was near,” is that it would afford too easy an opportunity for the people to return to Egypt. They would be tempted to do this if they had to face armed conflict. Nachmanides comments that if that were the meaning of the words כי קרוב הוא, the Torah should first have written the words כי אמר אלוקים, ”for G’d had said, etc.” The whole verse should then have read as follows:ולא נחם אלוקים דרך ארץ פלשתים כי אמר אלוקים כי קרוב הוא, לכן, “and G’d had not led them the route via the land of the Philistines, for He had said that even though it is nearer it is too easy to turn back from, therefore, etc.” It was better therefore to lead them on a more circuitous route as they would not then have the temptation to return to Egypt rather than face immediate armed conflict. [“the land of the Philistines” is a synonym for crossing any inhabited region which would be opposed by such inhabitants. Ed.] We find a similar construction in Psalms 41,5, רפאה נפשי כי חטאתי לך, “heal me for I have sinned against You.” Clearly, the meaning of the word כי could not be “for I have sinned against You,” but must be: “although I have sinned against You.” Some commentators understand the words כי קרוב הוא as not describing something spatial, but as referring to timing. G’d meant that an immediate arrival at the borders of the land of Canaan would then occur before the fourth generation of Canaanites had forfeited the patience of G’d, so that He could legally deprive them of their land and give it to the Israelites. [the word קרוב בימינו, “soon in our days,” and many other such uses of the word קרוב for relating to something that would occur soon are too numerous to need to be quoted. Ed.] Yet another interpretation of the words כי קרוב הוא understands it as describing the political common interests of the Philistines and the Egyptians that would cause the former to help the Egyptians recapture their slaves. Still another approach to the words כי קרוב הוא, sees in them a reference to the devastating defeat suffered by 200,000 members of the tribe of Ephrayim, who thirty years earlier had decided that the 400 years that G’d had spoken about to Avraham were at an end, and who had decided on their own, to escape from Egypt and when approaching the land of the Philistines were annihilated by them. G’d did not want to risk re-awakening such memories by making the people travel that route. The very word כי with its numerical value of 30 is a veiled reminder to the reader what it is all about. Moreover, G’d feared that if the Israelites would get involved in war before the three days travel into the desert that they had been given permission for were up, and on account of their fear they would return to Egypt, the Egyptians would be willing to let them return, whereas once the three days had passed, even if for some reason other than war, they would decide to return to Egypt, the Egyptians would not welcome them, but treat them as traitors who had broken their word. Therefore, G’d wanted a situation to develop which would make a return to Egypt even more dangerous an undertaking for the people than facing uncertain dangers by moving ahead. בראותם מלחמה, “when they would face armed conflict.” Rashi understands this as a veiled reference to the war against Amalek and the Canaanites. Nachmanides writes that neither the war against the Amalekites nor that against the Canaanites would trigger a desire by the people to return to Egypt. The Amalekites had attacked the Israelites not because the Israelites threatened them, but because they represented a spiritual threat to their way of life. They would also have attacked the Israelites if they had decided to remain in the desert without looking for a homeland. G’d simply wanted any war to be delayed until the Israelites were so far away from Egypt, that returning to Egypt simply would not be a viable option. Facing war, or rather, avoiding war against the Philistines, would leave open the option of return to Egypt.

ויהי בשלח פרעה את העם, when G’d intended to bring them to the land of Canaan, but did not want to lead them through the land of the Philistines although it was the closest route, כי קרוב הוא, and G’d feared that when faced with the need to conduct battles they would appoint an alternate leader in order to return to Egypt and submit to the Egyptians. We know that the Israelites tried to do this several times whenever they felt frustrated. (Examples are Numbers 14,3, Numbers 11,5) The disgruntled Israelites on such occasions “suddenly remembered” how good they had it in Egypt, citing the fish they ate for free, etc., as examples of their having been better off in Egypt. In light of what happened, although the Israelites did not have to face the armed might of the Philistines, G’d’s foresight in not leading them on that route seems extremely understandable. As a result of such considerations we find ויסב את העם דרך המדבר, that G’d made the Israelites take a much longer route in the direction of the Sea of Reeds. Moses described that had the Israelites traveled a straight path from their point of departure the whole journey would not have required more than 11 days. (Deuteronomy 1,2). Proof that the route to Egypt via the land of the Philistines is the shortest and most traveled route is furnished by Yitzchok’s declared intention to move to Egypt on account of the famine in the land of Canaan if G’d had not ordered him to stay in that land and he settled in the land of the Philistines while already on the way to Egypt (Genesis 26,3-6).

כי קרוב, “because the people were close to the Lord,” as stated in Psalms 148.14: לבני ישראל, עם קרובו הללוי-ה, “for Israel, the people close to Him.” This is the reason why He led them not as in the custom of the world. An alternate interpretation of the line above: seeing that the land of the Philistines was so close to Egypt, as we know from Genesis 10,13-14:למצרים ילד את לודים...אשר יצאו משם פלשתים, “and Mitzrayim begat Ludim....from whom the Philistines are descended.” פן ינחם העם ושבו מצרים, “lest the people would reconsider and turn back to Egypt;” (if they would have to fight for their freedom with lethal weapons) The Philistines being so closely related to the Egyptians would take up arms in support of the Egyptians and they would push back the Israelites to Egypt. Rabbi David, grandfather of Rabbi Moshe, said that legally the land of the Philistines was a part of Palestine, as we do not find that Yitzchok ever left the land of Israel although he sojourned in the section populated by the Philistines for many years. (Genesis 26,6) Rabbi Moshe claims that a narrow tongue of land emanating in the land of the Philistines extended deep into the land of Israel. He concluded this, seeing that the Torah called the land: “the land of the Philistines.” An alternate approach: as soon as the Canaanites heard that the Israelites had left Egypt they reminded themselves of G–d’s promise to Avraham that the fourth generation of his descendants would return to the land of Canaan. (Genesis 15,16). In the event, the fourth generation had not yet been born and raised. In fact, G–d was forced to make the Israelites wander in the desert for 40 years so that they would not invade the land of Canaan prematurely, and without support from Hashem. Instead, they would spend their time studying the Torah, and receive their sustenance by way of miracle, bread from heaven, and water by means of a well which traveled alongside them all the time till the death of Miriam. Nonetheless, the Canaanites were now afraid that the Israelites would try to dispossess them of their country; in order to deny the Israelites the advantages of possessing their land they started a policy of systematically ruining the soil of their land. When G–d saw this, He was faced with a dilemma, seeing that He had promised to bring Avraham’s descendants to a land of bountiful fruit, ample rainfall, etc., if He waited with making good on His promise He could not keep that part of it. This dilemma is what the prophet Hoseah referred to when he wrote in Hoseah 7,15: ואני יסרתי זרועותם ואלי יחשבו רע; “but I braced, I strengthened their arms, and they plot evil against Me!”

So Hashem led the people around by the way of the wilderness to the Sea of Reeds, and the children of Israel went up armed out of the land of Egypt.

ויסב means HE LED THE PEOPLE ABOUT from the direct route to a circuitous route. ים סוף is the same as לים סוף TO THE RED SEA. The word סוף has the meaning of a marshy tract in which reeds grow; examples are: (Exodus 2:3) “She placed him in the reeds (בסוף)”; (Isaiah 19:6) “The flags and the reeds (וסוף) shall wither”. וחמשים — The word חמשים means provided with weapons (Mekhilta). — [Because He led them by a circuitous route through the wilderness He brought it about that they went up from Egypt well-provided; for had He led them circuitously by the route of an inhabited district they would not have provided for themselves every thing that they needed, but only a part, like a person who is travelling from place to place and intends to purchase there whatever he will require. But if he were setting out for the wilderness he must provide all that he will require. — This verse (statement in the verse) is written only with the view of making the ear understand (preparing you for a later statement) viz., that you should not wonder with regard to the war with Amalek and the war with Sihon and Og and Midian where they obtained weapons, since they smote them with the sword]. In a similar sense it says, (Joshua 1:14) “and ye shall pass over armed (חמשים)”. Onkelos, too, translated it by מזרזין which signifies “armed” in Aramaic, just as he translates the word וירק in (Genesis 14:14) וירק את חניכיו which means, “And he armed his trained servants” by וזריז. Another explanation of חמשים is: only one out of five (חמשה) went forth from Egypt, and four parts of the people died during the three days of darkness because they were unworthy of being delivered (Mekhilta; cf. Rashi on 10:22).

AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL WENT UP ARMED OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT. This means that even though G-d led them about by the way of the wilderness, they still feared lest the Philistines who dwelt in the nearby cities come upon them. Therefore they were armed, as are people who go out to war. Some scholars say that Scripture is relating that they went out with a high hand, deeming themselves redeemed from bondage, and they did not leave like slaves escaping [from their master].

"And He turned" — from verbs whose root is doubled (sabav); it can also follow another pattern, like "va-yasekh be-dlatim" (Job 38:5) and "va-yagel et ha-even" (Gen. 29:10). Do not heed those who say its root is nasav. The word "ha-midbar" draws both itself and what follows along with it: the meaning is "by the way of the wilderness" — the wilderness of the Sea of Reeds. Similarly: "the ark of the covenant" (Josh. 3:14) means "the ark — the ark of the covenant"; "the tree of knowledge" (Gen. 2:9) means knowledge of good and evil; "the deed of purchase" (Jer. 32:12); "the wine of fury" (ibid. 25:15); and many like them. "Suf" is a place name. Some say it derives from "sof davar" (Eccl. 12:13), since it is the end of the world — the ocean. This I have already mentioned to be a grave error, for it is an eastern sea adjacent to Egypt, and the sea of Spain is larger than it. "Ve-chamushim" — some say this means laden with wealth, having all their needs. But it is written, "and provisions they did not prepare" (above, 12) — so what would be the point of mentioning this now? The explanation is rather: girded at the loins for war, like "chalutzim ta'averu" (Deut. 3:18), which means girded at the loins. The reliable proof is: "and you shall cross over chamushim" (Josh. 1:14) while elsewhere they are called chalutzim. For what would be the point of carrying provisions before their brothers? The reason Scripture mentions "ve-chamushim" here is that it was stated above that they would see war; for they went out with a high hand, armed with weapons of war, and not like slaves fleeing.

דרך המדבר ים סוף, that they should march to the Sea of Reeds via the desert. On that route they would neither encounter travelers headed in the direction of Egypt, nor would they encounter travelers who had come from Egypt who could report that Pharaoh was going to chase them, until Pharaoh would actually catch up with them by which time a “voluntary” return to Egypt and slavery would not be of any advantage to them anymore, as their surrender would not then be acceptable to Pharaoh. וחמושים עלו, although they had left Egypt fully armed. They did not have the courage to face the Egyptians in combat in spite of their being armed. They felt too inexperienced to face trained warriors.

וחמושים עלו בני ישראל, and the Israelites went up armed, etc. It is possible that if the Israelites had not been armed they would not have listened to Moses' (G'd's) order to make an about turn away from the land of the Philistines so that they would not face an immediate battle. The Israelites therefore needed two reasons for not returning to Egypt at the slightest danger, i.e. possession of arms and the unlikelihood of having to use these arms. Combining these two factors would result in לא ינחם, that they would not have second thoughts.

דרך המדבר ים סוף, “the route through the desert bordering the sea of reed.” The word של, “of” was omitted here as something that the reader can fill in for himself, just as it has been omitted in “הארון הברית,” in Joshua 3,14, where we read: הארון הברית instead of הארון שהוא ארון הברית, “the ark, which is the ark housing the covenant.” In Genesis 2,9 we find a similar construction, i.e. עץ הדעת טוב ורע, where we would have expected instead: עץ שהוא דעת טוב ורע, “the tree which is (the key) to knowledge of good and evil.” וחמושים, according to Rashi, the meaning of the word is: “armed.” According to Rashi, the fear of the Israelites was not due to their not having arms with which to defend themselves. They were well armed. You are not to wonder where the Israelites had taken all these arms from, arms which they used in the desert for several wars, starting immediately after they had crossed the sea of reeds and had been attacked by the Amalekites. They needed these arms again when the conquered the land of Canaan under the leadership of Joshua. An alternate explanation of the word: חמושים. The word refers to provisions for the journey. The word is used in Genesis 41,34, where it describes the provisions stored by Joseph in anticipation of the seven years of famine that were to follow the seven years of plenty. In practice this meant (according to tradition) that the dough the Israelites took with them lasted them a whole month until the 15th of lyar, when the heavenly food, the manna took over. The reason for the need for that miracle had been that G-d took the people on a detour through the desert. (Compare Mechilta)

.וחמושים עלו בני ישראל , “the Israelites were armed when they came out of Egypt.” The plain meaning of the words is that when the Israelites left Egypt they were like the vanguard of an army preparing for battle. This was contrary to the rule that the Jewish people are not like the Gentile nations in that they have to make only the first motions of doing things in a regular manner before miraculous forces intervene to help them. (Compare Nachmanides on Numbers 13,2). For instance, we find that although G’d commanded Joshua (Joshua 8,2) to prepare an ambush against the people of Ai, we could ask that if the people of Israel, and especially their leader Joshua, were such experts in invoking miracles to help them, why did they need to lay an ambush, something perfectly natural? The answer is that G’d wants us to do whatever is possible in a natural way, following accepted norms. Anything beyond that we have to leave to celestial forces. Solomon confirms this principle in Proverbs 21,31: “the horse is readied for the day of battle; but victory comes from the Lord.” In other words, men have to do their share before G’d will do His share. This is why it was essential that the Israelites take weapons with them when they left Egypt. A Midrashic approach: (Tanchuma Beshalach 1) The word חמושים means “one out of five.” Four fifths of the Jewish people died during the plague of darkness so as not to give the Egyptians the satisfaction of knowing that these Israelites had not been found worthy of redemption. Some say that the word חמושים refers to one in fifty Israelites only being redeemed. Some even claim that only one out of 500 Israelites was found worthy of redemption. It may pay to make the following calculation. In 14,7 the Torah speaks of שלישים being on each of the chariots which pursued the Israelites. Some say this means that for every Israelite at least three Egyptians were in pursuit. Others claim that thirty Egyptians were in pursuit of each Israelite. Still others (all using the word שלישים) argue that 300 Egyptians pursued each Israelite (on each chariot?). The commentators who understood the word חמושים as referring to the number five also consider the word שלישים as referring to the number three. Those who consider the word חמושים as a reference to five hundred, obviously are the ones who also considered the word שלישים as referring to three hundred. The words על כלו at the end of 14,7 are understood as referring to “each Israelite,” not to “each chariot” According to the first opinion then there had been three million male adult Israelites in the service of the Egyptians prior to the plague of darkness. Assuming three hundred Egyptians pursued each Israelite the number of Egyptians drowned at the sea would have amounted to nine hundred million as they had thought that three million Jews had left their country (not knowing that most had died). In fact we do find a Midrash Hagadol according to which when G’d descended to Egypt nine hundred million angels of destruction descended with Him. Most of the sages are agreed that the Egyptians who went in pursuit of the Israelites numbered ninety million regardless of whether they held that one out of five Israelites left Egypt or one out o fifty or one out of five hundred. They all arrived at the number by combining it with the word שלישים. It is agreed that G’d dispatched nine hundred million destructive angels against that force, i.e. one angel against one thousand Egyptians. This is the meaning of this Midrash. You will observe that the word chamushim though read as if it were spelled חמושים, is actually spelled without the letter ו, i.e. חמשים “fifty.” This teaches that Torah which was given to the Jewish people on the fiftieth day after the Exodus was the purpose for which they left the bondage and Egypt. (compare Zohar volume 2 page 46). Furthermore, there is the fact that the Exodus has been mentioned in the written Torah a total of fifty times.

וחמושים עלו בני ישראל, “and the Israelites were armed when they went up.” The Torah records that although G’d led the Israelites in the direction of the uninhabited desert, where normally no encounter with sizable hostile forces need to be anticipated, they were armed, enabling them to cope with such unforeseen eventualities. They were still afraid that the Philistines or neigbouring tribes might fight a war of aggression against them, as opposed to defending their territory’s sovereignty. Alternately, the phrase is meant to depict the Israelites as marching with full confidence, not as people with a slave mentality.

As a result of such considerations we find ויסב את העם דרך המדבר, that G’d made the Israelites take a much longer route in the direction of the Sea of Reeds. Moses described that had the Israelites traveled a straight path from their point of departure the whole journey would not have required more than 11 days. (Deuteronomy 1,2). Proof that the route to Egypt via the land of the Philistines is the shortest and most traveled route is furnished by Yitzchok’s declared intention to move to Egypt on account of the famine in the land of Canaan if G’d had not ordered him to stay in that land and he settled in the land of the Philistines while already on the way to Egypt (Genesis 26,3-6). וחמושים, fully armed. The expression חמושים meaning armed occurs in Joshua 1,14 and is implied in Exodus 3,8 where G’d declared His intention to lead the Israelites to the land of Canaan, Obviously, the Canaanites were not expected to hand over their land without a fight.

And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, for he had solemnly made the children of Israel swear, saying: "Hashem will surely remember you, and you shall bring up my bones from here with you."

השבע השביע HE HAD STRAITLY ADJURED — He had made them swear that they would make their children swear. But why did he not make his sons swear that they would take him to the land of Canaan immediately on his death, as Jacob had made his sons swear? Joseph said: I was a ruler in Egypt and I had sufficient power to do what my father desired; but my sons — the Egyptians will not permit them to do this. Consequently he made them swear that when they would be delivered and would go forth from there that they would take him up with them (Mekhilta). והעליתם את עצמתי מזה אתכם THEN YE SHALL BRING UP MY BONES AWAY HENCE WITH YOU — It was his brothers whom he made swear thus; consequently this tells us that they (the Israelites who left Egypt) must have brought up with them the bones of all Jacob’s sons (lit., the tribes) since it is said “with you” (with your own bones) (Mekhilta).

"And he took" — Scripture stated above that the children of Israel who were alive in that generation went up; they also brought up with them the most honored one among them, through whom they had gone down to Egypt. He adjured them before his death that they should say so to their children and their children's children. Moses therefore took pains to fulfill the oath, so that guilt would not fall upon Israel. We see that the princes of Israel swore to the Gibeonites — and they had sworn to them only on condition that they were from a distant land, as they said; and when it was found that they were nearby, it would have been right not to uphold the oath, and they and all Israel would not have been transgressing the commandment "you shall not leave any soul alive" (Deut. 20:16). But for the sake of the honor of Hashem they acted so as not to profane His name. Yet many years later Hashem punished the children of Israel because Saul had allowed the Gibeonites — who were in Nob, the priestly city — to be killed. Scripture mentions "bones," for all the flesh and skin decay from worms and rot, and within a few years only bones remain.

ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו, seeing that he was now the leader of the nation it was up to him to make good on the oath Joseph השבע השביע את בני ישראל, any obligation undertaken communally must be honoured by the leader of that community when the time and opportunity presents itself to discharge that obligation.

פקד יפקד אלוקים, "when G'd will surely remember you, etc." The reason the Torah repeats the word פקד is in order to emphasise the manner in which Moses kept faith with the promise made to Joseph by his brothers. The first time the word פקד simply means that G'd will certainly keep His promise to redeem the Israelites. This included only removal of the negative aspects of the Jews' exile. There was, however, also a positive aspect to the bondage, the one described in Genesis 15,14, namely that the Israelites would leave Egypt as wealthy people. According to Bechorot 5 not a single Israelite took less than ninety donkeys' loads of silver and gold out of Egypt. Joseph foresaw that the Israelites' preoccupation with loading the animals with all these valuables were a reason for their leaving his bones behind; this is why he made the brothers swear that even the preoccupation with their newly acquired wealth should not make them forget his bones at that time. In any event Moses was the only one who instead of loading his animals with valuables went in search of Joseph's remains and eventually loaded Joseph's bier on his donkey (compare Shemot Rabbah 20,19). At a later date G'd rewarded Moses by letting him keep the splinters of the precious stones from which he carved the second set of tablets. מזה אתכם, "with you from this place." The word מזה does not mean "from here," i.e. that Joseph thought the brothers would have to locate his remains exactly in the place where he made them swear this oath. Joseph used the expression as the reason he asked the brothers to swear such an oath. He considered it as a small repayment of all the favours he had done for the brothers during their stay in Egypt. He went so far as to hint that taking his bones out of Egypt for burial in the Holy Land would compensate for the time when they had separated themselves from their brotherhood with him; the angel had told Joseph in Genesis 37,17 that the brothers נסעו מזה "had departed from זה" (the number 12, symbol for the 12 brothers, compare Bereshit Rabbah 84). Joseph used the words מזה אתכם to indicate that if the brothers would fulfil their oath he would consider them as having re-instated him in their midst. The sin they had committed against him at that time would then have been wiped out. In other words, Joseph would forgive the brothers posthumously, for simply swearing the oath.

כי השבע השביע, the repetition of the words “he made swear repeatedly,” was that Joseph did not know which generation would experience the Exodus. Joseph had told his brothers that by committing them to this oath he was not asking them for a favour: they who had been instrumental in his being dragged to Egypt as a slave if they wanted to complete the act of repentance,must ensure that he would be brought to burial in the land of his forefathers from where he had been kidnapped. He had performed a mission on his father’s behalf when he came to Sh’chem (Genesis 37,14) and this is why he expected to be buried near there. This is where he was interred eventually, as we know from Joshua 24,32.

ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף, “Moses took the remains of Joseph, etc.” While the Israelites were still preoccupied with material concerns such as demanding silver and gold from the Egyptians, Moses was preoccupied with nobler matters, needs of the soul, by performing the commandment of seeing to it that Joseph would eventually be interred in Eretz Yisrael. This was in accordance with Proverbs 10,8 quoted in Sotah 13, that “he whose heart is wise accepts commands.” Joseph had acquired the merit of having brought his father Yaakov to burial in Eretz Yisrael; as a result he received the distinction of having his own remains taken out of Egypt by someone greater than him, by Moses. In return for having performed this commandment Moses himself was interred by someone greater than he himself, by the Almighty personally, as we know from Deut. 34,6: “He (G’d) buried him in the valley, etc.” I have discussed this matter in connection with Joseph’s death (Genesis 50,28). We have also found a Bereshit Rabbah 87,10 that Moses needed to take Joseph with him as otherwise he could not have split the Sea of Reeds. This miracle occurred as a compensation for Joseph who at the time had fled from the presence of his master Potiphar’s wife, placing himself in a most embarrassing situation by leaving his garments inside the house (Genesis 39,12). The Torah describes his departure there as וינס ויצא החוצה, “he fled-and went outside.” We find the same word וינס applied to the motion of the Sea when G’d (Moses) parted it (Psalms 114,3 ) הים ראה וינס, “the Sea saw and fled.” What did the Sea see which made it retreat? “It saw the remains of Joseph.” We find another similarity of expression between what happened to the brothers and Joseph and to something which happened at the Sea. In Genesis 50,21 when Joseph tries to calm his brothers’ fears that now that Yaakov was dead he would revenge himself on them, וינחם אותם וידבר על לבם, “he comforted them and spoke to their heart.” A the splitting of the Sea we find the expression (Exodus 15,8) בלב ים, “in the heart of the Sea.”

And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him. This matter is connected to the verse above and the children of Israel went up armed, because it states in the Yalkut in this portion that they were walking in the desert with two arks — the ark of the Divine Presence and the ark of Joseph. The nations would ask, “What is the significance of the ark of a dead person alongside the ark of the Living Eternal One?” And they would answer them, “This one fulfilled what is written in that one,” for Joseph fulfilled all ten commandments, etc. This is connected to what was said and the children of Israel went up armed — and their weapon was the Holy Ark that would go with them in battle. This makes sense after the giving of the Torah, but before the giving of the Torah, how did they go up armed? After all, they did not yet have the Holy Ark with them. Therefore it says, And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him, because Joseph’s ark was as if all ten commandments were engraved upon it. Another explanation: Moses saw that the Holy One, blessed be He, led them around by way of the wilderness of the Red Sea, and Moses thought that if perhaps the sea would block their way, then it would be split for them in the merit of Joseph. As our Sages learned (Tanchuma 114:9) from the verse The sea saw and fled (Psalms 114:3) — what did it see? The bones of Joseph, of whom it is said he fled and went outside (Genesis 39:12). And the reason for this matter we explained above in the portion of Vayeshev (39:12). And our Sages (Sotah 13a) expounded about Moses, the verse The wise of heart will take mitzvot (Proverbs 10:8), that while all of Israel was busy with the spoils, he was occupied with fulfilling commandments. They sought to explain the redundant language of with him [in the verse], which comes to exclude involvement with the spoils of Egypt, because wealth is a possession that does not cling to a person, as his wealth will not descend after him [to the grave]. However, what a person accumulates in good deeds in this world is what clings to him both in this world and in the World to Come. Therefore it says, And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him. And perhaps this is why he specifically engaged in this commandment now, to serve as a reminder to Israel about the day of death, because through this they would not be so eager for the spoils, remembering that he will leave his wealth to others, and his glory will not descend after him.

ויקח משה את עצמות יוסף עמו, “Moses took the earthly remains of Joseph with him.” Actually, the Torah should have written this verse already when reporting the very first move of the Israelites out of Ramses. (12,37) Why did the Torah report it as if belonging to the second day of the Israelites’ journeys? We may have to answer that whereas on the first day the Israelites took the remains of all the sons of Yaakov collectively, whereas only on the second day did they get around to separating Joseph’s coffin from those containing the remains of the other brothers.

And they journeyed from Sukkoth and camped at Etham, at the edge of the wilderness.

ויסעו מסכת AND THEY JOURNEYED FROM SUCCOTH — on the second day, for on the first day they had come from Rameses to Succoth (Exodus 12:37).

"And they journeyed" — Etham is the wilderness of Shur, as I shall explain.

ויסעו מסכות, “they journeyed from Sukkot;” on the second day.

And they journeyed from Succoth, the place where they had been covered with the clouds of glory, and sojourned in Ethan, which is on the side of the desert.

And Hashem was guiding before them by day in a pillar of cloud to lead them on the way, and by night in a pillar of fire to give them light, to travel by day and by night.

לנחתם הדרך TO GUIDE THEM IN THE WAY — It (the ל of לנחתם) is punctuated with Patach, because it (the word) is like לְהַנְחוֹתָם (being a contracted form of this); similar is, (Deuteronomy 1:33) “לַרְאֹתְכֶם the way in which ye shall go”, which is the same as לְהַרְאֹתְכֶם to show you. Thus, too, here: לנחתם means as much as להנחותם to make them be guided i. e. by means of an agent. And who was this agent? The pillar of cloud — and the Holy One, blessed be He, in His glory (Himself) led it before them. Nevertheless He Himself did not act as their immediate guide, but He provided the pillar of cloud that they might be guided by means of it, for, as a matter of fact, as the Scriptural account shows, it was by means of the pillar of cloud that they set forth on their journeys. The pillar of cloud was not for giving light to them but to show them the way.

AND THE ETERNAL WENT BEFORE THEM. The Sages have already said, “Wherever the phrase And the Eternal is mentioned, it means He and His Celestial Court.” The Holy One, blessed be He, went before them by day, and His Celestial Court by night. If so, the explanation of the verse is that G-d abode in the midst of the cloud, and He went before them by day in a pillar of cloud. By night, His Celestial Court abode in a pillar of fire to give them light. This is similar in meaning to that which the verse says: Inasmuch as Thou Eternal art seen face to face, and Thy cloud standeth over them, and Thou goest before them, in a pillar of cloud by day, and in a pillar of fire by night. I have seen in Eileh Shemoth Rabbah: “For ye shall not go out in haste, neither shall ye go by flight; for the Eternal will go before you. In the past, I and My Celestial Court went before you, as it is said, And the Eternal went before them by day, but in the World to Come, I Myself will go before you, as it is said, For the Eternal will go before you, and the G-d of Israel will be your rearward.” The secret of this Midrash is as I have mentioned, i.e., that at the first redemption, the Holy One, blessed be He, was with them by day and His Celestial Court by night, but in the World to Come, the attribute of His Celestial Court will be elevated in mercy and the Eternal — the Tetragrammaton — will go before them, for the G-d of Israel will then assemble His people, and the night will shine as the day, the darkness even as the light, as everything will then be united in the attribute of mercy. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that Scripture here speaks according to the language of men, since it was the power of G-d and His messenger that went with Israel, [thus, and the Eternal went before them would mean “and the angel of the Eternal went before them”], similar in meaning to the verse, He caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses. Now it is true that the verse here is similar in meaning to the verse, He caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses, but it is not as Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra understood it. And it is further written, So didst Thou lead Thy people to make Thyself a glorious Name, [thus indicating that it was the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself that went before the people, and not, as Ibn Ezra explained, that the reference here is to an angel].

"And Hashem went before them by day" — we know that Hashem "inhabits eternity and His name is holy" (Isa. 57:15) and "He who sits enthroned from of old" (Ps. 55:20). Yet Scripture speaks in the manner of human beings, because Hashem's power went with Israel, in the manner of "who caused His glorious arm to go at the right hand of Moses" (Isa. 63:12). The meaning of "in a pillar of cloud" is that it did not resemble ordinary clouds, but rather the likeness of a pillar extending from the heavens to the earth; it is called a pillar because a structure stands upon it. The meaning of "to go by day and by night" is that the camp was so large that they could not travel except a short distance at a time; they therefore traveled part of the day and part of the night. These two pillars went before them until they came to the sea, as I shall explain.

וה' הולך לפניהם, from the time the Israelites had reached Sukkot, at the border of Egypt, just beyond, G’d’s presence had manifested itself the moment they entered the desert.

וה׳ הולך לפניהם יומם, And G'd would walk in front of them by day, etc." The Torah chooses the word לנחותם to indicate that G'd made the journey comfortable. When it was hot G'd made the cloud spread over them to protect them against the sun. The cloud performed this function only by day. The cloud described here has nothing to do with the column of cloud which preceded the Israelites which smoothed rough passages and showed them the way to go. We have some proof for this in Deut. 1,33 where the Torah is specific by stating that the cloud in front of them was "to seek you out a place where to pitch your tents. The column of fire by night was to show you the way you were to walk, and a cloud by day." The Torah speaks of three separate phenomena then, 1) to seek you out the way; this cloud was with them all the time. 2) The column of fire to enable them to see at night. 3) a cloud by day. The latter was the cloud which we described as providing shade against the heat of the sun. We do not agree with Rashi who understands the word לנחותם as להנחותם, and that the letter ה is missing. Rashi tries to prove his point by citing לראותכם (Deut. 1,33) as a parallel. According to our interpretation the letter ה is also not missing in the verse in Deuteronomy. ולילה בעמוד אש להאיר, and at night in a pillar of fire to provide light." According to Shabbat 22 the Israelites "walked" during the entire forty years only by light provided by G'd which was so powerful that it enabled them to look even into the darkest spot. [The discussion in the Talmud centers around the question why Aaron had to light the candelabra in the Tabernacle when G'd had already illuminated all with His own light. Ed.] The Talmud cannot speak of the hours of darkness as this would not agree with the language employed there. If that were the meaning, what does the Talmud mean "they marched only by the light of the heavenly fire?" Surely the Talmud means that the Israelites did not march by sunlight during the days. Why then would the night not be as bright as the day so that they had no need for a special column of fire at all? If we want to understand what took place at that time we must pay attention to the words ללכת יומם ולילה, "to walk by day and by night." Why was the Torah not satisfied with writing: "in order to provide light for them," and had to add the words: "to walk by day and by night?" We must conclude therefore that A) the light G'd provided for the Israelites at that time never departed from the camp of the Israelites as our sages explained, but that B) it also never extended beyond the boundaries of that camp either. There was a good reason for this. In the terrible desert which normally is the domain of impurity, a region in which the forces of the קליפה are at home (Zohar section 1, page 126), the Israelites were the beneficiaries of the heavenly light within the boundaries of their camp; outside their camp it was night (dark) for them just as it was for everybody else...

“and the Lord, etc:” the letter ו at the beginning of the word indicates that G-d’s “entourage” accompanied Him.” An alternate interpretation: the letter ו, as we mentioned already on Genesis 19,24, refers to the angel Gavriel. ללכת יומם ולילה, “to keep marching both by day and by night, in order to convince Pharaoh that the Israelites were fleeing. This would make him pursue them.

וה' הולך לפניהם יומם, “and G’d would walk in front of them by day, etc.” Seeing that the term “walking” cannot truly be applied to G’d, the plain meaning of this verse is that the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night which had taken up position in front of the Jewish people to show them the way, served as a sign for them that G’d in His capacity as Hashem was accompanying them every step of the way. These two pillars acted as their eyes in the desert and as protection against the dangers lurking in the desert. When the Torah quotes G’d (Exodus 19,4) saying: “I carried you on the wings of eagles,” the reference is to these pillars of cloud and fire mentioned in our verse. Seeing that these pillars were designed to save the Israelites, they became the instruments by means of which the Egyptians were judged, as we read in 14,24: “He looked down upon the camp of Egypt through a pillar of fire and cloud and He confounded the camp of Egypt.” This prompted our sages (Mechilta 14,29) to comment on the words והמים להם חמה, “the waters of the Sea were for them (the Israelites) a wall, chomah,” to change the vowel pattern and to add that for the Egyptians these same waters proved to be a cheymah, i.e. an expression of G’d’s anger at them. Midrash Tehillim, 22,2 quotes a similar interpretation when explaining the verse א-לי א-לי למה עזבתני, the Midrash says that what was “light” for Israel (King Chizkiyahu) proved to be destructive fire for Sancheriv, King of Assyria. It is described graphically there that the prophet Isaiah and King Chizkiyahu sat down in the Holy Temple and that a fire erupted between them which consumed Sancheriv and his army. A kabbalistic approach: The words (especially the letter ו introducing the word י-ה-ו-ה at the beginning of a verse), are an allusion to G’d acting in unison with His heavenly tribunal. G’d resided within the pillar of cloud which traveled ahead of the Israelites by day, whereas His heavenly tribunal has its abode within the pillar of fire and traveled ahead of the camp of the Israelites at night. This is the meaning of “He and His heavenly tribunal,” i.e. the Shechinah and the attribute of Mercy. This is also the meaning of such expressions as (Isaiah 63, 12) זרוע תפארתו, as well as the word ימינך in 15,6. In all those instances the same instrument G’d employed to save the Jewish people He employed to simultaneously destroy its adversaries. This is the mystical dimension of the line in the Haggadah shel Pessach בנגפו את מצרים ואת בתינו הציל, “when He smote Egypt while saving our houses.” The verse (Numbers 14,14) כי עין בעין נראה אתה ה' ועננך עמד עליהם וגו', “that You Hashem appeared eye to eye Your cloud stands over them, etc.” is to be understood in the same way. ללכת יומם ולילה, “to travel by day and by night.” According to the plain meaning of the text the verse tells us that the Israelites were so eager to arrive at the destination where they would receive the Torah on the fiftieth day that they traveled both by day and by night. This was in contrast with other travelers who are tired by nightfall so that they interrupt their journey even when they are in inhospitable surroundings. A Midrashic approach: They traveled by day and by night as the Torah they were to receive was something that applied and was to be studied both by day and by night (compare Joshua 1,8). A kabbalistic approach: The reason the Torah wrote ללכת יומם ולילה, was to tell us that they strove to emulate the two attributes called “day” and “night.” The whole line is to inform us that these two attributes were ever-present. If the Torah had wanted to describe their mode of travel, i.e. that the pillar of cloud and the pillar of fire respectively traveled both by day and at night the wording would have been ללכת ביום ובלילה. The reason they traveled both by day and by night was to get them used to accept these two attributes as facts of life. [Rabbi Chavell refers to a commentary by Nachmanides at the beginning of the third chapter of Job in this connection]. As a result of the above-mentioned considerations the Israelites were forced to travel by day and by night. The meaning of the words לנחותם הדרך is precisely this, i.e. to teach them a way of life, not as we might think, “to show them the route.” The words להאיר להם, normally translated as “to provide physical light for them by both day and night,” [which are superfluous as we all know that this was their purpose, Ed.], must therefore be understood in spiritual terms, i.e. ‘to enlighten them” through the attributes called “day” and the attribute called “night.”’ In order to understand the whole concept better, consider Proverbs 24,21 ירא את ה' בני ומלך, ”Fear the Lord my son and King;” The Israelites were praised by Jeremiah (2,2) who said to them that G’d still remembered “the devotion of your youth, your love as a כלולותיך (pl) bride, when you followed Me in the wilderness.” The prophet mentioned two separate qualities (attributes) when mentioning כלולות, i.e. יום and לילה. The choice of the word כלולות which is a doubling of כל, means that these two attributes are interdependent, do not exist one without the other. The prophet referred to two good attributes of the Jewish people which enabled G’d to redeem them at the time. One of the most important aspects of the Exodus was the honour and glory the Israelites experienced in the manner in which they were redeemed. An additional reason for the Torah describing the Exodus as if the Jewish people were traveling both by day and by night, was to give Pharaoh the impression that they were fleeing. This in turn would persuade him to mount pursuit. Coupled with the fact that his spies told him that the Israelites were moving very erratically, turning around at Baal Tzefon, he became convinced that he would prevail against them. This gave G’d a chance to drown the Egyptians in the Sea of Reeds. It was a perfect illustration of what Chanah said in her prayer (Samuel I 2,3) “by Him actions are calculated.”

וה' הולך לפניהם, “and the Lord would walk in front of them, etc.” Ibn Ezra writes that this verse is an example of the Torah using syntax man is familiar with, and the meaning is that the Divine power in the form of His messenger traveled with the Israelites. Nachmanides writes that he has mentioned on previous occasions that whenever we encounter the formulation וה', this always refers to Hashem together with the celestial court of Justice. The Torah narrates that G’d’s glory was enveloped in the cloud above the Israelites which would move continuously a short distance ahead of the main body. At night, the celestial court would be enveloped in the pillar of fire. להאיר להם, “in order to provide light for them.” These two clouds were needed to provide artificial light for them, as the Israelites being enveloped in these clouds, could not tell whether it was day or night beyond the clouds they saw.

וה' הולך, the angel accompanying the Israelites on their journey positioned himself at the head of the marching columns in the guise of a pillar of cloud by day and a fiery column of flame at night. יומם ולילה, the reason that they traveled both by day and night was to make Pharaoh rethink his decision and to see in them people who were in flight.

The pillar of cloud did not depart by day, nor the pillar of fire by night, from before the people.

לא ימיש means He — the Holy One, blessed be He — did not let depart (did not remove) את עמוד הענן יומם ועמוד האש לילה THE PILLAR OF CLOUD BY DAY NOR THE PILLAR OF FIRE BY NIGHT. — This tells us (we may gather from this) that the pillar of cloud handed over the camp to the pillar of fire and the pillar of fire handed it over to the pillar of cloud — that before the one set the other rose (Shabbat 23b).

"Did not depart" — this is a transitive verb: Hashem, mentioned above, did not cause the pillars to depart from before the people. The word "yomam" (daytime) is never found anywhere in Scripture except for the period when the sun is above the earth. For "yom" (day) does appear in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Writings referring to nighttime: it is written, "on the day I struck every firstborn" (Num. 5:17), and that occurred at night; it is written, "this day is a day of good tidings" (2 Kings 7:9) — and it was night, for it says there, "we wait until the morning light" (ibid.); and it is written, "the day I cry out, at night before You" (Ps. 85:2).

עמוד הענן יומם, “the pillar of cloud by day;” The only other time when the word: יומם occurs in the Torah is when it describes a period when the sun shines on earth. On the other hand, the expression יום, occurs also both in the Torah and in the rest of the Bible when describing a particular day regardless of whether is daylight at the time. In the Torah we find: ביום הכותי כל בכור (Numbers 3,13) although we know that it was at midnight. In the Book of prophets we find the word יום applied to something that happened at night in Kings II 7,9: היום הזה יום בשורה, “this day, the day of good tidings.” It is clear from the context that these words were spoken at night. The speakers added: “let us wait with bringing this news until morning.” In Psalms 88,2 we read: יום צעקתי בלילה נגדך, “a day when I cry out at night before You.” לא ימיש, “it did not depart;” the word used is in the future tense, however; we would have expected the Torah to have written: לא מש instead.

לא ימיש עמוד ענן יומם, “the pillar of cloud would not depart by day, etc.” The reason the Torah repeats this is to teach that the two pillars were complementary to each other as explained by the sages in Shabbat 23.

לא ימיש, the subject is G’d. The word is in the transitive modern hiphil, meaning that G’d would not allow the pillar of cloud and the column of fire to depart from being at the head of the people either by day or by night.