Commentary for Exodus 8:29

אמור אל אהרן נטה את מטך, “say to Aaron to stretch out his staff, etc.” seeing that we have been told earlier (6,6) that G’d would employ His זרוע נטויה, “outstretched arm,” when the “hand” was employed instead, the Torah had to spell this out. Ibn Ezra claims that the stretching out of Aaron’s hand with the staff in all four directions resulted in the frogs emerging from the streams and rivers as well as from the lakes, but not from the ponds.

נטה את ידך, “extend your hand!” G-d wanted Pharaoh and the Egyptians to see that the cause of the plague wasMoses, although it was Aaron who actually extended his arm with Moses’ staff over the river.8.2. ותעל הצפרדע, “the frogs emerged from the river.” Even though the Torah uses the singular mode here, the meaning is that swarms of frogs came forth. We find something similar in Numbers 21,7 when the Torah describes the plague of snakes besetting the people as if it had been only a single snake, i.e. ויסר מעלינו את הנחש, “may He remove the snake(s) from us.”

ותעל הצפרדע AND THE FROGS (lit. frog) CAME UP — Really there was only one frog, but when they struck at it, it was split into many swarms. This is a Midrashic explanation of the usage of the singular noun here (cf. Sanhedrin 67b; Exodus Rabbah 10:4). But as a literal explanation one must say that the swarm of the frogs is denoted by the singular form. Similar is, (v. 14) “and there was the כנם” — the swarm of insects, in old French pedulier; i. e. a swarm of lice. So, too, here, ותעל הצפרדע means: and there came up a grenouillière (old French) i. e. a swarm of frogs.

ותעל הצפרדע, “the frogs emerged from the river.” Even though the Torah uses the singular mode here, the meaning is that swarms of frogs came forth. We find something similar in Numbers 21,7 when the Torah describes the plague of snakes besetting the people as if it had been only a single snake, i.e. ויסר מעלינו את הנחש, “may He remove the snake(s) from us.”

ויעלו את הצפרדעים, the ones produced by the sorcerers were unable to reproduce themselves, as were those that Aaron had produced. The sorcerers were never able to produce any creature that could move on its own. [It is important to realise that our author considers the צפרדע as a type of crocodile, the major danger to humans and fish inhabiting the Nile. Ed.]

ויעשו כן החרטומים, “the sorcerers did likewise. “They succeeded in making frogs emerge from the relatively few ponds which had not yet produced frogs. Seeing that they were unable to make the frogs retreat to their natural habitat, [presumably this had been the task set for them by Pharaoh Ed.] Pharaoh saw himself compelled to appeal to Moses and Aaron to pray to their G’d to stop the plague.

Kap. 8. V. 3. Wenn dies dahin zu verstehen sein sollte, dass auch die Schriftkundigen Frösche haben heraufbringen wollen und heraufgebracht haben, so ist dieser Vers uns völlig unerklärlich. Aaron hatte ja bereits die Frösche über das Land Mizrajim heraufgebracht, was blieb den Schriftkundigen zu tun übrig? Man könnte meinen, als Aaron seine Hand geneigt, hätten sie rasch irgend einen Hokuspokus gemacht, damit es scheine, als hätten sie die Frösche heraufgebracht. Allein das hätten sie auch bei der כנים-Plage tun können. Es kann auch nicht sein, dass sie ihr Experiment nur an etwas wenigem Wasser gemacht hätten; denn es heißt: sie brachten Frösche über das Land. Erwägt man jedoch die Stellung der חרטומים in dieser ganzen Geschichte näher, so erscheint sie überhaupt sehr eigentümlich. Waren sie solche Meister, so hätten sie ihre Macht zur Befreiung des Landes von den Plagen, nicht aber zur Vermehrung derselben verwenden sollen. Waren etwa zu wenig Frösche da? In der Tat scheint auch, im Gegensatz zu der gewöhnlichen Auffassung, ihr Bemühen bei jeder Plage die Entfernung derselben gewesen zu sein. So heißt das ויעשו וגו׳ להוציא את הכנים ולא יכלו im V. 14 doch offenbar: sie taten usw. um das Ungeziefer wegzuschaffen und vermochten es nicht. Man bezieht, wie uns scheint, irrtümlich das ויעשו כן überall auf die Wirkung, die Mosche und Aaron hervorgebracht hatten, und es bezieht sich, wie uns scheint, offenbar nur auf die erscheinenden Mittel, auf die vorangehende Hand- und Stabbewegung, die Aaron vor Eintritt der Plage zu machen hatte. Die ahmten die חרטומים nach, um sofort, angeblich, der eintretenden Plage entgegenzuwirken. Dass dieses כן sich auf diese vorangehenden Bewegungen bezieht, ist eben aus V. 14 völlig klar. Heißt es ja auch V. 13 von Mosche und Aaron: ויעשו כן und wird dies sofort erklärt: ויט אהרן וגו׳. Demgemäß hieße es denn hier: Aaron hatte seine Hand über Mizrajims Gewässer geneigt. Die Schriftkundigen machten auch eine solche Bewegung, um Aarons Wirkung entgegenzuwirken; allein der Erfolg war ein entgegengesetzter: ויעלו את הצפרדעים וגו׳, nach ihrer Bewegung kamen erst recht die Frösche über das Land herauf. Es dürfte dies bestätigen, dass zuerst (V. 2) nur der Singular gebraucht ist, הצפרדע, hier aber der Plural הצפרדע .את הצפרדעים zu צפרדעים verhält sich wie הדגה zu דגים. Der Plural bezeichnet die Geschöpfe nach ihrer Menge, eine Vielheit solcher Individuen. Der Singular bezeichnet das Geschlecht in seiner Gattungseigentümlichkeit. Wo bei den Plagen zum Ausdruck kommen soll, dass auf Gottes Geheiß die Wesen im Gegensatz zu ihrer sonstigen Natur gehandelt haben, steht der Singular. So הדגה, der Fisch, dessen Element ja sonst das Wasser ist, starb im Flusse. הצפרדע, das scheue Froschgeschlecht, das sonst sich vor dem Menschen verkriecht, stieg herauf ans Land. Hätten die Kundigen auch Frösche hervorgebracht, so hätte dies Pharao ja nur in seiner Weigerung bestärkt, und das V. 4 folgende ויקרא פרעה וגו׳ wäre unmotiviert. So aber, da er die lächerliche Ohnmacht seiner Kundigen gewahrte, die mit ihren Künsten nur das Gegenteil ihrer Absicht provozierten, ließ er Mosche und Aaron rufen.

בלטיהם, “with their spells.” According to Rashi, these “spells” are called such as the word means “silently,” they employed whispers to produce such illusions. Rashi had given this interpretation already on 7,11 where the spelling of the word had been slightly different.

'העתירו אל ה, he did pay attention to the aspect of getting rid of this plague, recognising that there was some use in calling on the G’d of the Israelites to remove the plague.

העתירו אל ה׳, "Implore G'd, etc." Why did Pharaoh not simply go to his home as he had done during the first plague? After all, his magicians had demonstrated in both instances that they were able to duplicate Moses' and Aaron's magic? Actually, we should interpret Pharaoh's beliefs as reflected by his reactions. He would not have called in Moses and Aaron to pray for him unless he had been afraid of the deathly effect of the plague in question.

V. 4. עתר. העתירו, verwandt mit חתר: irgendwo gewaltsam eindringen, auch mit Gewalt ein Schiff gegen den Strom rudern, daher עתר: heftig in jemanden dringen. Im Hiphil also: lasset meine dringende Bitte zu Gott kommen, oder: wie man beim Pharao eines Fürsprechers bedarf, so, meinte er, kämen auch Mosche und Aaron nicht direkt bei Gott vor, hätten vielmehr mächtige Fürsprecher bei ihm, die sie jetzt für ihn verwenden möchten.

The plague of blood did not represent a threat to life as people could still their thirst by either digging for water in the vicinity of the river or buying same from the Israelites. As a result, Pharaoh did not become overly agitated at that plague.

The plague of frogs contained two elements. 1) It was accompanied by an overpowering noise orchestrated by all those frogs; 2) the frogs invaded people's entrails as we know from 7,29 "and the frogs shall come upon you, etc." This plague was very frightening, no one being certain of his survival. These considerations are what prompted Pharaoh to implore Moses to remove this plague accompanied by a promise that he would release the Israelites to offer sacrifices to their G'd. When he said: ממני, he referred to his entrails, which was the most frightening aspect of the plague.

Pharaoh did not ask Moses for removal of the third plague, the insects, even though he had watched his magicians' impotence and admission that this plague was indeed a "finger of G'd;" his heart remained obstinate as the plague, painful though it was, did not constitute a danger to life.

The fourth plague, that of wild animals invading Egypt's urban areas was truly fear-inspiring and resulted in Pharaoh instructing Moses and Aaron to go and take the Israelites to sacrifice to their G'd within the country. For the first time, Pharaoh was prepared to negotiate where this could take place. At any rate, he pleaded with Moses to pray on his behalf.

The plague of pestilence did not move Pharaoh particularly as its main effect was on the animals, though none of the livestock owned by the Israelites died. Pharaoh remained obstinate, did not release the Israelites and did not ask Moses to pray to stop the plague.

The sixth plague, painful boils on the skin, also did not move Pharaoh to prayer as it was not a life-threatening situation although for the first time even his magicians did not remain immune.

The plague of hail was a major spectacle not only ruining the crops but killing people who had not heeded G'd's warning. For the first time Pharaoh reacted by admitting that he and his people had sinned against G'd. He pleaded with Moses to pray and not only promised to release the Israelites but did so without attaching conditions.

During the eighth plague, the locusts, the Torah quotes Pharaoh's alarm when, for the first time, his servants move him to negotiate the Israelites' release before the onset of the plague. Negotiations having broken down, the plague does occur and Pharaoh pleads for G'd "to remove this death."

We do not find that Pharaoh asked Moses to pray on his behalf during the plague of darkness; perhaps this was due to his attempt during the first three days of that plague to counter it by lighting all kinds of lanterns, etc. During the following three days when no one could even rise from his seat, Pharaoh was incommunicado and could not send a messenger to call Moses to intercede on his behalf. After the seven days of darkness were complete, Pharaoh immediately sent for Moses to tell him that he and his people could leave and that they only had to leave their livestock behind as insurance that they would return. Moses immediately refused the condition. Seeing that the plague of darkness was already over, there was no point in asking Moses to pray for its removal.

התפאר עלי GLORY OVER ME — Similar is, (Isaiah 10:15) “Should the axe יתפאר against him that heweth therewith” i. e. should it boast, saying “I am greater than thou”; old French vanter. Therefore התפאר means pride yourself on showing your cleverness and on asking of me a difficult matter asserting that I shall be unable to do it.

L’MATHAI’ (AGAINST WHAT TIME) SHALL I ENTREAT FOR THEE? Rashi commented: “If the text said mathai (when) — [not l’mathai] — shall I entreat, it would signify ‘when shall I pray?’ But now that it said l’mathai, it means ‘Today I will pray for you that the frogs be destroyed by the time which you will set for me. Say then by what day you wish that they shall be destroyed.’”
In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, the removal of the plagues took place at the time of Moses’ prayer, as it is written, And Moses cried unto the Eternal, etc., and the Eternal did according to the word of Moses¹³²Verses 8-9. and it is not written “and the Eternal did so tomorrow.” The letter lamed in the word l’mathai is no proof that Moses prayed immediately, for the word l’mathai is equivalent to mathai, there being many verses where the lamed occurs [just for elegance of language], thus: ‘l’min’ (from) the day that thou didst go forth out of the land of Egypt;¹³³Deuteronomy 9:7. The lamed in the word l’min is superfluous. until ‘l’minchath’ (the offering) of the evening;¹³⁴Ezra 9:4. There the lamed in l’minchath is a superfluous style. the wing of the one cherub was five ‘l’amoth’ (cubits).¹³⁵II Chronicles 3:11. Here the lamed in l’amoth is superfluous. There are many other such cases.

התפאר עלי, arrogate to yourself the right to ask what you want of me and I shall carry out your wish. The construction is similar to Judges 7,2 פן יתפאר עלי ישראל לאמר ידי הושיעה לי, “lest Israel be arrogant enough vis-à-vis Me to say: ‘my hand has been strong enough to provide my own salvation.’”

למתי אעתיר לך?. In order that you will recognise the difference between what your sorcerers are able to do and what G’d is capable of doing. When Moses offered two scenarios to Pharaoh, i.e. when the crocodiles would die, and henceforth restricting them to the river Nile, he also had in mind that whatever the sorcerers had done would be strictly limited in duration, and things would return to normal, whereas G’d could maintain the changes He had effected in nature indefinitely, totally or partially as He wished.

התפאר עלי, "have this glory over me, etc." What exactly did Moses mean by the expression התפאר עלי? If what he meant was that even if Pharaoh would ask for an immediate removal of the frogs this would constitute his glory, the result of Pharaoh asking that the frogs be removed only on the morrow would indicate that he was not interested in besting Moses; Moses' confirmation: "as you have said," would make little sense in that scenario. We also need to analyse why Moses did not say מתי אעתיר לך which we would have expected, but said למתי וגו׳?

למתי אעתיר לך?, “for when should I entreat for you?” According to Rashi, Moses offered to pray immediately for the plague to cease at a time of Pharaoh’s choosing. Nachmanides, approaching the text from a literal perspective, claims the plague disappeared immediately at the time Moses prayed, as we know from verse 9 “G’d did in accordance with Moses’ word.” The Torah did not write that the frogs disappeared on the morrow. The letter לin the word למתי does not prove anything concerning the timing of the cessation of the plague. According to Nachmanides there is no special significance in the construction למתי, as to when precisely the frogs should die.

By asking something difficult and then saying. . . In other words, [see] if you can ask me to do something that I cannot do, then you can boast that I [was shown to be inferior because I] could not do it.

V. 5. פאר, התפאר verwandt mit באר: ans Licht treten, daher באר: leuchten wo das unterirdische Wasser ans Licht tritt, davon פאר: ins Licht hervortreten, leuchten. פאר : alles dasjenige, was den damit Geschmückten ins Licht hervortreten läßt, hervorhebt. פער: öffnen, dem Lichte Zutritt schaffen. — Dass Mosche die Bitte nicht einfach übernimmt, sondern das Weichen der Plage selbst zu einem אות gestaltet, lag in der Bitte selbst motiviert. Wäre Pharao bereits überzeugt gewesen, er hätte das Volk ohne weiteres frei gelassen. So war es klar, er suchte eben nur Befreiung von der Plage. Darum sollte das Fortgehen der Frösche selbst ein belehrendes אות werden; vielleicht würde dies Erfolg haben. Die Frösche sollen daher nicht einfach wieder zurückkehren, das hätte als bloßes Aufhören der göttlichen Einwirkung und als Rückkehr in den natürlichen Zustand gedeutet werden können. Sie sollen sterben, und zwar auch nicht allgemein, es hätte dies wieder als ein physisches Phänomen begriffen werden können. Vergl. V. 9.

!התפאר עלי למתי, אעתיר, “have this boast over me about when you will release the Children of Israel, and I will pray for the frogs to disappear immediately!”

למתי אעתיר FOR WHAT PERIOD SHALL I ENTREAT FOR THEE — With reference to the entreaty which I shall make to-day regarding the destruction of the frogs, by what period do you wish that they should be destroyed, and you will see whether I can carry out my promise by the time which you will set me. If the text said מתי אעתיר (without ל), it would signify “when shall I pray?” but now that it is said למתי, it signifies I will pray to-day for you that the frogs should be destroyed by the time which you will set for me. Tell me, then, by what day you wish that they shall be destroyed. The words here, אעתיר and העתירו (v. 4) and העתרתי (v. 25) are Hiphil forms, and it does not say אֶעְתַּר and עִתְרוּ and וְעָתַרְתִּי (Kal forms) because wherever the root עתר is used it denotes to pray much (more lit. Rashi’s words signify “to multiply praying”, “to make much praying”), and just as one says אַרְבֶּה and הַרְבּוּ and וְהִרְבֵּתִי which all have the meaning of “causing an action to happen” (in this case, causing a thing to be much — our Hiphil conjugation), so one says אַעְתִּיר and הַעְתִּירוּ and וְהֵעְתַּרְתִּי “I increase”, “increase ye” and “I will increase” i. e. I will increase words. The passage which serves as evidence of the meaning of all these words is (Ezekiel 35:13) “וְהֵעְתַּרְתֶּם your words against Me” — which can only mean “Ye have multiplied” (being a transitive verb; cf. Rashi on Genesis 25:21).

THAT THE FROGS BE DESTROYED. This is an allusion to their death, just as the expressions: that soul shall be cut off;¹³⁶Further, 12:19. and I will cut off from Ahab every man-child.¹³⁷I Kings 21:21.
The intent of Moses’ repeating the promise to Pharaoh, And the frogs shall depart, etc.,¹³⁸Verse 7. was to state that as soon as he will have prayed, the frogs will all be removed, and that Pharaoh should not fear that when these frogs die, others will come up from the river. Rather, the plague will be completely removed even though some of them will remain in the river.¹³⁸Verse 7. All this was to inform Pharaoh that the plague came from G-d for the sake of Israel alone.

למתי אעשה לך?, for which day and at what hour would you like for all the frogs to depart, and I will pray forthwith that they will all die before that deadline. Seeing that they do not normally all die at once, you will realise that my prayer will have been answered. [Moses wanted to forestall Pharaoh asking for the frogs to all die immediately. Ed.]

להכרית הצפרדעים, “to wipe out the frogs.” Seeing that Pharaoh had been under the impression that the frogs would increase dramatically, Moses prayed that the frogs should die forthwith, the word להכרית being of the same root as such verses as ונכרתה הנפש ההיא, “that particular life will be terminated, etc.” (Genesis 17,14, Exodus 12,15, et al.) The reason Moses prayed for the death of the frogs and not for their return to their habitat, was so that the stench from their carcasses should remind the Egyptians of how their conduct vis a vis the Jews was viewed by the G’d of the Jews. Pharaoh had assumed that Moses had meant that the removal of the plague meant that the frogs would return to where they had come from. Moses assured him that the frogs remaining at this time in the river would indeed remain there, but that the ones already on dry land would perish there. The line (promise) וסרו הצפרדעים, “the frogs will depart etc.,” (verse 7) was not meant to suggest that they would leave Egypt, but that a plague of frogs emerging from the river would not occur again. Moses’ elaborating on all this to Pharaoh only meant to prove to him that the plague emanated from G’d, and that it was decreed on account of his treatment of the Jewish people.

By when do you wish them destroyed. . . You might ask: What was Moshe asking him? Surely Pharaoh would like them destroyed immediately! The answer is that Moshe reasoned: if I pray to have them destroyed immediately, Pharaoh will be obligated to release Yisrael immediately, as promised to me (v. 4) — and this is bad for him. Thus Moshe did not know which Pharaoh prefered — [keeping Yisrael, or destroying the frogs]. An alternative answer is what the Ramban says, citing the Naggid.

I believe Moses wanted to demonstrate that G'd tries to oblige those who are dear to Him so that it was beyond his imagination that G'd would forsake him (not do what he promised). He did this by contrasting the relationship between man and G'd with that of slave and master. When a slave asks a favour from his master he will be happy if his master grants the favour at all and it would not occur to him to attach conditions as to the time when such a favour has to be granted. He will be even less likely to ask for the date of such a favour to be advanced or delayed, but will await the time when he judges his master to be in a favourable frame of mind to grant his request. He will be most happy if his request is granted at the time it pleases his master. Not so the relationship between Moses and G'd. Moses was anxious to demonstrate to Pharaoh that a) he could offer a prayer at any time; b) his prayer would not only be granted but that he could attach conditions as to the "when" of G'd's response. This is why he asked Pharaoh what time or day he wanted him to pray that the frogs should disappear. Pharaoh was to prove himself superior in that he could determine when Moses should pray.

לעמך, “and for your people;” the letter מ in this word has the semi vowel sheva. Logic tells us that this plague did not last one quarter of a month. If you were to say that the conversation between Moses and Pharaoh took place on the sixth day of this plague, it does not make much sense, as the plague would have come to an end on the following day anyways without Moses praying for its removal.

And not אעתר עתרו . . . [Rashi says as he does] because אעתיר העתירו והעתרתי is in the verbal form of הפעיל , which is transitive. However, our verse should use the [intransitive] form of אפעל , such as אעתר עתרו ועתרתי , since it is describing prayer, which is intransitive. Thus Rashi explains: “Because wherever a form of. . .”

So, too, does it say אעתיר . . . In other words, it is transitive because the direct object of the verb is “words”. [It is conjugated] as if “words” was actually written in the verse.

והעתרתם your words about me, meaning you have increased. Rashi is saying that [here is the main proof] because it is written explicitly, “your words”.

ויאמר למחר AND HE SAID, FOR TO-MORROW — He said: Pray to-day that they may be destroyed by to-morrow.

AND HE SAID, FOR TOMORROW. It is a known fact that it is man’s nature to pray that his misfortune be removed from him at once. [The question then arises: Why did Pharaoh say that the frogs were to be removed tomorrow?] In the name of the Gaon Rav Shmuel ben Chophni,¹³⁹The father-in-law of Rav Hai Gaon, the last of the Gaonim. See Vol. I, p. 97, Note 477. Rav Shmuel, who was the Gaon of the Academy of Sura, wrote extensively in Arabic on Biblical exegesis as well as on Halachic themes. Only fragments of his work are now extant. He is quoted by Ibn Ezra (as in this case) and R’dak. In Biblical commentary, his method generally was that of the rationalist. they have explained that Pharaoh thought that perhaps some heavenly constellation brought the frogs upon Egypt, and that Moses [by his knowledge of astrology] knows the time when they will disappear, and therefore Moses had said to him, Have thou this glory over me,¹⁴⁰Verse 5. thinking that Pharaoh will now tell him to destroy them immediately. Therefore Pharaoh extended the time until the morrow.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that because Moses had said, Against what time shall I entreat for thee,¹⁴⁰Verse 5. Pharaoh thought that Moses was desirous for time, and so he fixed the shortest time limit, And he said, For tomorrow. Moses answered him, “According to thy word, let it be so, for since you did not ask that they be removed immediately, they shall not be removed until tomorrow.”

למחר, pray now that they should all die by tomorrow!

כדברך, in accordance with your wish. You had stipulated that the crocodiles should be removed from yourself, and from your people,” (verse 4) you did not ask for them to be eliminated from nature as a species.

ויאמר למחר, He said: “as of tomorrow.” The whole world wonders why Pharaoh did not choose an immediate cessation of the plague. The answer given is that Pharaoh was still under the illusion that possibly this was a natural phenomenon, the approach of which had been overlooked by the astrologers, and that the frogs would disappear of their own accord in short order. By asking Moses not to stop the plague immediately, he hoped to disprove that G’d had anything to do with it. Nachmanides writes that from the word למתי, “for when,” used by Moses, Pharaoh had thought that Moses would be unable to stop the plague in short order, but that it might take at least a week, (as it had with the plague of blood). This is why he allowed Moses only a very short period to make good on his boast. Moses told him that he would honour Pharaoh’s wish for when the plague should cease. Other commentators understand the word למתי as not relating to the plague and its cessation at all, but understand it as Moses asking Pharaoh when he would release the Israelites in response to the plague’s cessation. Pharaoh promised to do so on the following day. However, he conditioned this on the understanding that Moses would pray immediately. The tone signs under the letters support this explanation somewhat, seeing that there is a pessik, a clear division sign, between the word למתי and the word אעתיר, “I shall pray, entreat.”

Pray today that they be destroyed by tomorrow. [Rashi knows this because] Moshe had asked, “When should they be destroyed?” Thus Pharaoh’s answer must refer to the time of their destruction, [not about the time of praying]. So explained Re’m. But this raises a difficulty: Why would Pharaoh want to suffer until the next day, and not ask for their immediate destruction? The answer is: Pharaoh thought that Moshe was a sorcerer who knows what times are auspicious. Pharaoh assumed that now is the auspicious time for destroying them, and when the time passes, Moshe will not be able to remove the frogs. Therefore he said “by tomorrow,” to show that Moshe works through sorcery. However, Moshe’s prayers were accepted whenever he prayed. (Maharshal) People ask: Why at the plague of frogs does it say, “Moshe cried out to Adonoy,” while at the other plagues it says, “Moshe prayed to Adonoy”? The answer is: One who prays must hear what he is saying, and the frogs were croaking as Rashi explained, thus during the plague of frogs Moshe needed to raise his voice in order to hear himself pray.

It is difficult to understand why Pharaoh wanted the frogs to be removed only on the following day. Although we know from Proverbs 21,10 that wicked people harbour a death wish (unconsciously), this applies only in the abstract. No wicked person deliberately opts for continued flagellation when given a chance to escape the pain involved. Why then did Pharaoh ask Moses to make his prayer effective only on the following day? At first glance one may be tempted to conclude that Pharaoh misinterpreted Moses' offer as proof of his awareness that the plague was about to come to an end, and that he wanted to take the credit for this by appearing to pray for the removal of the frogs at once. Pharaoh therefore wanted to show up Moses as a fraud. He interpreted Moses' use of the word התפאר as a trick designed to induce him to ask for the immediate removal of the frogs. This is why he decided to suffer a little longer if only he could expose Moses as a fraud.

V. 6. Unser Gott ist nicht auch ein Gott, etwa der allerhöchste; denn auch der höchste Gott der Heiden ist gebunden und steht unter der Naturnotwendigkeit, gebietet wohl über das Geschick der Menschen innerhalb der Naturordnung, hat aber keine Gewalt über diese Ordnung. Es soll dir klar werden, dass du unseren Gott mit keinem vergleichen kannst.

ויאמר: למחר, he said: “for tomorrow!” He meant to say: “I will send your people on their way tomorrow!” A different interpretation that was brought by Rashi: the word למחר refers to the disappearance of the frogs on the day following. Pharaoh thought that the reason that Moses had asked him to determine when the frogs should disappear was that he thought that Pharaoh would, of course, wish to get rid of them immediately, and Moses was aware that they would leave without his doing anything to hasten their disappearance. This is why he thought he could show up Moses as a sorcerer by asking him to delay their departure. In the event he was disappointed.

למען תדע כי אין כה' אלוקנו, that there is no power in the universe other than the G’d of the Israelites who possesses the power to fundamentally effect changes in natural law. At that time, consigning crocodiles exclusively to the river Nile was a fundamental change in the habitat of this species. This species is different from all other known species in that instead of moving its lower jaw when eating, it moves its upper jaw. It also ingests food without excreting waste products. G’d will banish the species only from you and your houses, as this is all you asked for.

What is wrong with this theory is that if Pharaoh wanted to unmask Moses as a fraud he did not really have to extend the period of his suffering at all by asking Moses not to pray until the following day. Besides, Pharaoh had never heard of a prayer that is offered up at one time and is not to be effective until the following day. This is why he wanted Moses to demonstrate that though he prayed now and his prayer would be accepted, the removal of the frogs would not be implemented until the morrow. This was the challenge Pharaoh presented to Moses when he said: למחר. He wanted proof that Moses prayed immediately though the frogs would not disappear until the morrow. When Moses told Pharaoh: כדברך, "as you said," he meant that he had accepted Pharaoh's challenge. Moses did not leave the city to offer his prayer (as he did on other occasions) but prayed inside the city in order for everyone to be aware precisely when he had prayed. This is why the Torah writes: "Moses and Aaron left the presence of Pharaoh and Moses cried out to G'd concerning the frogs G'd had brought on Pharaoh, etc." Moses prayed concerning two matters. 1) Removal of the frogs. 2) Not to remove the frogs until the following day. This is why the Torah states על דבר הצפרדעים, "concerning the matter of the frogs," instead of להסיר הצפרדעים, "to remove the frogs."

וסרו הצפרדעים, G’d will not only remove the ones which have already bothered you, but He will ensure that they will not again afflict you.

V. 7. מלרו ,וסרו gegen die Regel der עוי, die nur sehr seltene Ausnahmen hat. מלרע wäre die Wurzel סרה und nicht סרה .סור heißt chaldäisch: faul werden. Im Hebräischen heißt nicht סרה, wohl aber סרח faul werden. Es kann sein, dass es heiße, nicht: sie werden zurückkehren, sondern: sie werden wegfaulen.

ממך ומבתיך, but not from the whole country; on the contrary, they will die in the land and cause a stench, but in the future they will not leave their habitat in or near the river.

“By tomorrow.” This can be explained according to the Zohar that states that witchcraft can be performed only from midday until midnight, but not in the morning. Pharaoh suspected Moshe of using witchcraft, and so when Moshe asked, “Exactly for when shall I pray for you?” he answered, “Tomorrow morning,” when it is impossible to do witchcraft. At the time they were together, however, it was after midday and he suspected that Moshe would use witchcraft.

ויצא. . ויצעק THEY WENT … AND CRIED [UNTO THE LORD) immediately that they should be destroyed by to-morrow.

ויצעק משה אל ה' על דבר הצפרדעים אשר שם לפרעה, Moses prayed that G’d remove only the crocodiles which had been sent against Pharaoh and his people, whereas any others should remain in the river. It required a special prayer, here described as an outcry, to ask G’d how to arrange the removal of this plague.

אשר שם לפרעה, which He had brought on Pharaoh. We learn from this that one must be articulate and precise when offering a request in prayer.

ויצעק משה, “Moses cried out;” seeing that he had gone out on a limb giving Pharaoh a chance to prove him wrong (התפאר עלי) without having first consulted G’d, he now had to add an element of urgency to his prayer, i.e. “he cried out.”

V. 8. ויצעק. Es war das das erste Wort, welches Mosche selbständig in seiner Sendung gesprochen. Er hatte es gewagt. Ein Mensch, der ganz eingeht in Gottes Ratschluss, fühlt leicht das Richtige heraus, trifft das Richtige im Sinne Gottes, und Gott עצת מלאכיו ישלים. Allein eben weil es das erste also gesprochene Wort war, darum "schrie" Mosche zu Gott um Erfüllung auf.

על דבר הצפרדעים, “concerning the matter of the frogs.” This is an allusion to what our sages (Sanhedrin 80) said when they claimed that the frogs were even quacking within the Egyptians’ entrails. [which would make G’d’s task of removing them difficult. Ed.]

וימותו הצפרדעים, “The frogs died.” How do we square this with verse 7 in which Moses predicted the frogs as “departing?” Moses had referred to the frogs as a plague departing, he did not predict that they would depart under their own power, as did the locusts in the eighth plague. On this occasion the dead frogs remained wherever they had died.

V. 9. מן הבתים מן החצרות ומן השדות, die Aufeinanderfolge ist rückwärts im Verhältnis zu der Richtung, in welcher sie gekommen. חצרות ist der Raum vor den Häusern. Nicht nur in den Häusern, selbst auf den Höfen, ja selbst auf den Feldern, wo sie doch ihrem natürlichen Aufenthalte im Flusse nahe waren und leicht dorthin zurückkehren konnten, starben sie.

מן הבתים, “away from the houses.” The frogs which had invaded the ovens of the Egyptians did not die, as they had displayed faith in G–d by invading such potentially deadly areas, all in the service of the Lord. (Yalkut Shimoni Vaeyra, section one, item 182)

מן הבתים מן החצרות, “from the houses and subsequently from the courtyards,” but not the frogs that had ventured into the ovens and kneading bowls. Seeing that these frogs had risked their lives by performing such a dangerous mission on behalf of G-d, they were allowed to remain alive. Compare Talmud Pessachim folio 53.

מן הבתים ומן החצרות ומן השדות, “from the houses, the courtyards, and the fields.” You will note that the frogs that had put their lives at risk by entering the ovens of the Egyptians, are not reported as having died. This was their reward for their self-sacrificing conduct in the service of the Lord. They were rewarded by returning to their habitat, the river, alive. The frogs that had remained in the river also did not die so as to preserve the species.

חמרים חמרים means IN HEAPS, just as the Targum renders it, דגורין, which means גלין heaps (דגורא is the Targum of הגל in Genesis 31:46).

חמרם, heaps.

V. 10. צבר .ויצברו verwandt mit ספר ,צור usw. צבר: Zusammentragen einzeln zerstreuter Dinge, damit sie nicht in ihrer Vereinzelung verloren gehen. Es liegt darin weniger die Absicht, einen großen Haufen zu haben, als damit das einzelne nicht zerstreut werde. Daher auch ganz eigentlich das Sammeln des Geizigen, dessen Sinn weniger auf das ganze gerichtet ist, sondern an dem einzelnen Heller klebt. (ספר: Verbindung des einzelnen zu einem ganzen: zählen). צִבור gäbe somit dem Begriff der Gemeinde erster Linie mehr die negative Bedeutung, dass der einzelne sich nicht verliere, das Ganze nicht in Atome auseinandergehe. — חֺמֶר: Haufe, חָמוֹר: gähren, חֺמֶר: Ton, חֵמָר : Mörtel, חֲמוֹר : Esel. Grundbedeutung: Massenbildung, Haufenbildung, Verbinden in der Absicht, einen Haufen, eine Masse zu haben. Daher: Haufen, Last, Lasttier. Natürlich verbundene, zusammenhaltende, nicht auseinanderfallende Erde: Ton. Verbindungsmittel: Mörtel. Auch Gährung ist im Grunde nichts anderes als der Zustand einer Flüssigkeit, wenn sich in ihr die verschiedenen gleichartigen Bestandteile zu gesonderten Massen verbinden. Diese Verbindung des Gleichartigen ist der positive Grund der Zerfällung, in welche die Gährung endet. Jede Gährung bildet חמרים חמרים. Verwandt damit ist עמר: die Garbe, und אמר: zur Rede verbundene Gedanken und Worte: Gedanken- und Wortgarbe. — Es heißt hier nun nicht: ויחמרו חמרים, auch nicht: ויצברו צבורים, sondern: ויצברו חמרים. Ihre Absicht war, das Land von den toten Fröschen zu reinigen. Allein daraus entstanden unabsichtlich Haufen, und die angehäuften Massen förderten nur noch die Verwesung und Fäulnis.

והכבד את לבו HE ALLOWED HIS HEART TO BE HARDENED — The word הַכְבֵּד expresses doing something (the Hebrew infinitive but having a past meaning) just as, (Genesis 12:9) “going (הלוך) and journeying (ונסוע)”. So, too, (2 Kings 3:24) “and smiting (והכת) Moab”; (I Samuel 22:13) “and enquiring (ושאול) of God for him”; (1 Kings 20:37); “smiting (הכה) and wounding (ופצוע)”.

HE MADE IT HARD [HACHBED]. Because this plague was great, his mind did not strengthen by itself, rather, he affirmatively acted wrongly to harden his mind.

כי היתה הרוחה, even though the evil had not been removed totally, seeing that the stench of the dead beasts remained and putrefied the atmosphere, and these beasts remained in the river as a possible threat in the future.

And where had He said this? When He said, “Pharaoh will not listen. . .” You might ask: Why did Rashi not make this comment before, regarding the plague of blood, where it is written, “Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened. . . just as Adonoy had spoken” (7:22), or regarding Aharon’s staff swallowing the others (7:13)? The answer is: Before, since the plague had not yet passed [and Pharaoh was suffering] and nevertheless he was persisting in his wickedness, his heart was certainly hardened because of what Hashem had said, “Pharaoh will not listen to you.” But here it is written, “[When] Pharaoh saw that there was respite, he hardened his heart and did not listen to them, just as Adonoy had spoken.” Thus Rashi is explaining how we know that even when there is respite, Hashem said that he will still not listen — for which Rashi cites the verse (7:4), “Pharaoh will not listen to you,” after which is written, “But then I will display My hand. . .” The question arises: if it is speaking where the plague did not yet pass, why does it say: “But then I will display My hand”? Obviously, it must be speaking where Pharaoh will have respite, and nevertheless he will not listen — and “then I will display My hand.”

And when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he became stubborn and would not heed them: It is likely that Moses and Aaron came to him after they removed the frogs to request from him that he send away the Israelites as he had promised them; but he did not listen to them. And they then said to him - according to what I think - that if he refused to send away the people, the dirt of the ground would be struck with the rod that was in their hands and it would become lice. And when he refused to send them away, Moses then commanded Aaron that he should strike the dirt of the ground and it become lice in all the Land of Egypt - as was their custom in the previous plagues. For they would only bring the plagues for the purpose of his sending away the Children of Israel from Egypt.

‎ כאשר דבר ה׳ AS THE LORD HAD SPOKEN — And where had He said this? When He said, (Exodus 7:4) “Pharaoh will not hearken to you”.

והכבד את לבו, He reinforced his natural courage not to be frightened of a re-emergence of the crocodiles that had remained alive. He was also willing to put up with the stench of the decaying beasts. All of this rather than to admit his impotence vis-à-vis the G’d of the Israelites.

אמר אל אהרן SAY UNTO AARON — The dust did not deserve to be smitten by Moses because it had protected him when he slew the Egyptian, for “he hid him in the sand”; and it was therefore smitten by Aaron (Tanchuma; Exodus Rabbah 10:7).

לכנם, different kinds of insects that cause man discomfort.

והך את עפר הארץ, they did not warn Pharaoh of the advent of this plague. Neither did they warn him before the onset of the שחין, the boils and blisters, nor before the darkness. The nine plagues, exclusive of the killing of the firstborn, were intended to serve as demonstrations of G’d’s power to change the laws of nature. Although the simultaneous dying of the firstborn was also a powerful such demonstration, it was intended as retribution for refusal to heed all the warnings G’d had extended to Pharaoh and his people. The first 3 plagues דצ'ך, demonstrated mastery of G’d over the two “heavy” components of the four basic elements the universe is made of, i.e. water and earth, The three plagues, abbreviated under the heading of עד'ש by Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi, demonstrates G’d’s control not only over inert parts of nature but also over living creatures. The third category בא'ח, demonstrated G’d complete control of the air, the atmosphere including the other two basic elements known as רוח and אש, air, wind, and fire. In each group the first two plagues were preceded by warnings, whereas the third was not. The matter has been alluded to in Job 33,29 הן כל אלה יפעל א-ל, פעמים שלוש עם גבר. “Truly, G’d does all these things, two or three times to a man.”

In the Septuagint it says σκνῖφες,¹skniphes and Philo of Alexandria in his book “On the Life of Moses” (Book 1:9) wrote that it is a flying insect, very small and very annoying in its sting, and also enters the ears and nostrils, and it requires great care to protect the eyes. And maybe this is Linnæus’s²Well-known taxonomist, formalizer of the standard binomial name format Culex pulicaris³One common variety of Egyptian biting midge, or Culex molestus⁴Commonly called the London Underground mosquito recorded by Forsskål⁵Peter Forsskål, a Swedish-speaking Finnish naturalist and a disciple of Linnæus as found in Egypt, which greatly pains those sleeping at night. And Eichhorn⁶Johann Gottfried Eichhorn, late Enlightenment era theologian, orientalist, and Biblical critic says that in the word kinnim there is no yod and the mem isn’t marking plural, but rather khnem or ch'nef is the name of an insect in the Egyptian language.⁷The standard Egyptological form of this word is ḫnws or ḫnms. The modern Coptic word is ϣⲟⲗⲙⲥ̄ šolmes Personally, I think that after Israel left Egypt and came to a land where this insect did not live, they referred to it the name kinnim to teach that it was like a different kind of insect that stings the flesh, and thus Onkelos says qälmta (vermin), and similarly in the Syriac Peshitta it says qälma. And the word is found in the Talmud (Berakhot 51b) — “From wanderers come words, from rags come qälmei” — and in the Tosafot on Shabbat 12a:5 where Rabbi Joseph of Orleans and Rabbeinu Tam debate if the kinnah is white and the par’ush is black or the other way around. And in the Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni 182:3) it says many kinds of kinnim came upon them, the smallest the size of a chicken egg and the largest the size of a goose egg. But in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 67b) it says: “And the court-mages said to Pharaoh, “The finger of God is this!” Said Rabbi Eliezer, from here we determine that a demon cannot make anything smaller than a barley-corn.

ויאמר ה' אל משה ,אמור אל אהרן, “The Lord said to Moses: “say to Aaron, etc.” This time Pharaoh was not given a warning of the upcoming plague. We do not find any warnings prior to the sixth or ninth plague either. Each of these plagues was the third in a series. We have a rule (Maimonides Sanhedrin 18,4) that if someone twice in a row ignores the penalty of physical punishment administered for sins committed and persists in his conduct, he will be confined in a prison on a starvation diet which will result in his early death. Nachmanides writes that Moses did not issue warnings to Pharaoh concerning impending plagues unless the plague in question would involve the death of Egyptians, and it would have been unfair not to forewarn them of impending death for ignoring Moses’ request. The plague of blood, for instance, could have resulted in the death of Egyptians who could not dig near the Nile to obtain subterranean water. Similarly, the plague involving the frogs wrought havoc amongst the Egyptians as we know from Psalms The three plagues vermin, boils, and darkness however, did not pose any threat to the lives of the Egyptians. Some of the warnings of the plagues were given by Moses after G’d had instructed him to deliver the warning early in the morning on the banks of the river Nile, -This does not mean an ungodly hour in the morning, but what is called “morning” for Kings, who habitually are presumed to be late risers.- The King at such times, would be accompanied by a sizable entourage so that the issuing of the warning was overheard by many people and Pharaoh could not have denied having received the warning. G’d selected this method in the hope that some of Pharaoh’s servants after hearing the warning, especially after the first plague, would try and make their ruler change his mind and release the Israelites. In the event that the servants did not try and change their ruler’s mind, they would be just as guilty as Pharaoh himself, and would have brought their misery on themselves by their own obstinacy. When we do not find G’d instructing Moses to warn Pharaoh in the morning, he received the warning while in a private audience with Moses and Aaron. Warnings in public also were the case when G’d had instructed Moses with the words: בא אל פרעה, “come to Pharaoh.” When such opportunities for Pharaoh’s servants to show themselves as less obstinate were not taken advantage of, the reason for delivering these warnings in public no longer existed. The well known abbreviations of the three groups of plagues, i.e. דצ'ך, עד'ש, באח'ב may also be explained in terms of the type of warnings preceding them, or no warning preceding them at all.. According to the Midrash, the letters in these abbreviations were engraved on Moses’ staff to indicate which plagues would be preceded by which warning or by the absence of any warning. Others claim that the division is based on which plague was orchestrated by Aaron, which by Moses, and which by Moses and Aaron jointly. Others hold that they are hints as to which plagues originated in the atmosphere and which originated on earth or in the water. Yet other opinions draw attention to the purpose of each of these groups of plagues, a purpose spelled out clearly by the Torah before each group of plague, each time the operative clause begins with למען תדע, ”so that you will realize that, etc.” Ibn Ezra writes that the first three plagues used the least sophisticated phenomena in our universe, i.e. water and dust. These plagues were initiated by Aaron. The plagues that were brought about by phenomena in the upper regions of our universe were orchestrated by Moses, seeing that Moses represented the highest level attained by any of G’d’s creatures. These were: hail, and locusts, which is brought on by the wind, an almost non-physical phenomenon. Similarly, darkness was also a plague that was brought on by the air, the atmosphere, something intangible. The third group such a wild beasts, pestilence, and the slaying of the firstborn was brought on directly by G’d Himself. The remaining plague, the boils, was brought on jointly by both Moses and Aaron without the staff having been used at all. The three plagues brought on by Aaron alone were orchestrated by means of the staff, as were the three brought on by Moses alone. None of the other 4 plagues involved use of the staff. Rabbi Saadyah Gaon writes that between them the plagues made use of the 4 basic raw materials our physical universe is made of. Three plagues utilized the basic material עפר, dust, i.e. earth; they were: “boils,” which originated in the dust remaining after the furnace has burnt its course. The vermin and the wild beasts, the other two, also made use of that raw material as all bodies are made of earth and return to becoming earth when the life they supported terminates. Three further plagues were based on the second raw material our universe consists of, i.e. on water. They were: blood, frogs, and hail. Still another three plagues made use of the third of the four basic elements, i.e. air. They were 1) דבר, the pestilence which struck especially the livestock. We have a verse in Psalms 91,6 מדבר באפל יהלך, which is interpreted by Bamidbar Rabbah 12 as describing disorders in the domain of air. [birds would not fall from the air, their habitat, unless someone had interfered with that habitat. Ed.] 2) the plague of locust, which had been brought on by unusual changes in the air, i.e. a wind blowing constantly from the same direction. 3) The darkness. The atmosphere was made opaque instead of transparent, so that people felt as if they were in a narrow prison and could not move at all. Finally, there was one plague, which employed the fourth basic element, fire; this was used in orchestrating the simultaneous killing of all the firstborn in Egypt. Separation of body and soul is the result of a subcategory of fire, i.e. heat, which disturbs the equilibrium needed for body and soul to live side by side in harmony. The plagues utilizing the staff as the instrument that resulted in the onset of each plague also show variations in the way the staff was employed on each occasion. Sometimes Moses is commanded: “take your staff and incline it, etc.” other times he is commanded: “take your staff and raise your hand in which you hold the staff, etc.” Sometimes he is commanded to first employ his hand followed by the staff, other times the sequence is reversed. Some commentators feel that the basic example is the plague of blood, and that the same procedure i.e. extending the hand which was holding the staff, was followed invariably in bringing on all these plagues, but that the Torah did not bother to repeat this each time. The Torah merely employs part of the procedure on different occasions, particularly when describing the execution of the command. These commentators are concerned to have us realize that Moses and Aaron carried out their instructions without deviating from them in the slightest.

V. 12. Die beiden ersten, dem גרות und עבדות entsprechenden מכות der ersten Gruppe waren erfolglos vorüber; darauf tritt die dritte, ohne Warnung, als Strafe ein. — עפר. wir haben im Deutschen nur das eine Wort Staub für zwei ganz verschiedene Begriffe: אבק und אבק .עפר ist das Wertloseste, der eigentliche Staub; עפר ist das Wertvollste ( — אפר ,עור ,עֵבר ,עפר —) die äußere lose Decke des Erdkörpers, die fruchtbare Erde, der Humus. Nicht עפר הארץ ,אבק, die "Erde" des Landes soll geschlagen und lebendig werden. Bis dahin war ihnen גרות und עבדות durch Wasser fühlbar gemacht worden. Jetzt tritt ihnen der Boden entgegen. Die fruchtbare ägyptische Erde soll sich in Ungeziefer verwandeln.

והיו לכנים, “they will become vermin.” These are the kind of vermin that are products of the dust, but only rarely attack human beings. They emanated from their customary habitat, like the frogs and other plagues.

כנים, von כנן: feststellen, כַּן : Unterlage, verwandt mit גנן und קנן .קנן: ein nisten, גנן: ein Stück Land einfriedigen, um darin zu leben. גָן: ein großes Nest, ein Garten. Es ist nicht unmöglich, dass כנים deshalb so heißen, weil sie Parasiten sind, auf anderen lebenden Organismen leben, es sind "nistende" Tiere, Schmarotzertiere, die auf andern leben und sich von deren Schweiß und Blut nähren.

And strike the dust of the earth and it will be as lice. It seems to me that these are the black lice they call pedoux because it is their manner to come from the dust, while the lice they call puce only come from human sweat. And it was the manner of the plagues to come from their place of generation — frogs from the river, and rain and hail from the sky, and such with all of them, and accordingly these lice must generate from the dust, and maybe there were many kinds of worms and pedoux and other midges whose generation is from the dust.

ותהי הכנם means the swarming was. In old French pedulier.

הכנם. The final letter ם is similar to the final letter ם in the word ריקם in Genesis 31,42 where it is not really required, [the exegesis is needed as the author considered the same final latter in the word לכנם in the previous verse as a plural ending. Ed.]

ותהי הכנם באדם, the insects remained on man, etc. We would have expected the Torah to say: כל עפר הארץ היה כנים, ותהי הכנים באדם "the whole dust of the earth turned into insects, and the insects remained on man, etc." Why did the Torah reverse this sequence by telling us first that the insects remained on man? We may understand this with the help of an argument between Rabbi Yoseph from Orleans and Rabbenu Tam cited on Shabbat 12 concerning the meaning of the word כנה. Some rabbis hold that what is meant is a black flea, an insect which originated in the dust and which is able to jump very high. Other rabbis hold that these "insects" were white parasites which originated on the clothes people wore. These rabbis prove their point by basing themselves on a statement in Berachot 51 according to which vermin is generated from rags. In order to prevent the reader from making the error that the כנה described here is the so-called כנה לבנה, the parasite, the Torah makes the point that it originated from the dust of the earth. Had the Torah used the version commencing with the words: כל עפר הארץ היה כנים, there could have been no question about the insects originating in the earth. The Torah therefore displayed wisdom by writing ותהי הכנם באדם, to tell us that the insects which were normally generated in dirty clothes now became a plague of intolerable dimensions so that both man and animal suffered from an excessive amount of fleas, etc., each of the variety they were familiar with.

ויעשו כן, “they did so.” Even though the command was executed only by Aaron, the Torah includes the issuance of the command by Moses, and that is why it uses the plural mode when describing its execution.

V. 13. Schmarotzertiere, כנים, kriechen sonst nicht an Tiere hinan, sondern entstehen an und auf ihnen. Nicht so hier. Der Erdenstaub ward zu כנים und sie krochen an Menschen und Tiere. Auch dies war gegen die sonstige Ordnung der Natur. In dieser Strafplage konzentrieren sich גרות und עבדות in schmerzhaft fühlbarer Weise. Mizrajim hätte fort müssen, wenn ihr Boden — der sonstige Stolz ihrer Existenz — dauernd in כנים umwandelt bliebe, und ohne Scheu krochen die lästigen Tiere an die hochmütigen Herren hinauf.

It is also possible that the Torah speaks about both variants of insects. The first category is alluded to in the words: ותהי הכנם באדם ובבהמה, meaning the varieties of parasites man and beast experience on their skin from time to time. This was in addition to the insects which originate in the earth and which are called כנים as distinct from the first variety which is called כנם. If this is correct, our verse does not serve as support for the opinion of Rabbi Yoseph from Orleans, and we would have to accept the view of Rabbenu Tam who proved in the Talmud that the insect known as the white one is a parasite, whereas the other one known as the black one, which is distinguished by its great jumps, is incorrectly referred to as כנה but is in reality a פרעוש. (This is also the ruling of the halachah compare Tur Shulchan Aruch, Or Hachayim ruling 315).

להוציא את הכנים TO BRING FORTH GNATS — to create them and to bring them forth from some other place (not from dust but to turn some other material into gnats).

AND THE MAGICIANS DID SO WITH THEIR SECRET ARTS TO BRING FORTH GNATS. The purport of the expression, and the magicians did so, [when it immediately says afterwards, but they could not], is that they hit the dust of the earth and incanted the demons and performed their secret arts, as they used to do at other times, in order to bring forth the gnats, but they could not. It is possible that the expression, and the magicians did so, teaches that they did indeed do the correct things which do bring forth the gnats, but they were not successful this time, [for G-d thwarted their plans]. The learned magicians knew what they could do and they had tried to do so at other times [and succeeded. Hence they tried to do it now, but they failed “because it was now the will of the Holy One, blessed be He, to remove that power from them henceforth],”¹⁴¹From Ramban’s sermon on Torath Hashem T’mimah. See my Kithvei Haramban, I, p. 146.

ולא יכולו. They were unable to produce anything which could truly move on its own.

ויעשו כן חרטומי מצרים, “the Egyptian sorcerers did likewise.” This does not refer to what they accomplished, but to their copying the manner in which Moses had produced the vermin. They struck the dust and chanted their incantations. Another way of understanding the words ויעשו כן, would be that they do not refer to the sorcerers trying to imitate Moses and Aaron, but to their using their own techniques, hoping to achieve a similar result. After all, on the previous two occasions they had succeeded at least in convincing Pharaoh that they too could produce the phenomena Moses and Aaron had produced. A third possibility of understanding our verse would be that far from wanting to increase the number of vermin, they endeavoured to get rid of them by using their standard methods. When they failed, they had to admit that Moses and Aaron were not mere sorcerers of a more advanced school, but that their art was inspired by Divine assistance.

ויעשו כן החרטמם בלטיהם להוציא את הכנים, “the sorcerers did so with their secret art in order to remove the lice.” Seeing the Torah testifies that they did not succeed, why did the Torah first write ויעשו כן, “they did likewise?” The words refer to the manner in which they wanted to reproduce the plague, i.e. they too struck the dust of the earth with their staffs, similar to what Moses had done (verse 12). Now that we know that ויעשו כן, “they did likewise,” does not necessarily mean that the sorcerers succeeded in duplicating Moses’ and Aaron’s miracles, we may presume that in the previous instance when the Torah wrote this expression (concerning the snake and the blood) the sorcerers also did nothing more than create an allusion. The words ולא יכולו, “they were unable,” applies to all their efforts.
Whereas prior to this the Egyptian sorcerers had been accorded the title חרטומי מצרים, here the word מצרים is missing. It is possible that up until now these sorcerers had been held in high esteem by all the Egyptians. Now, however, they had already lost some of their image in the eyes of the people. By the time the third plague occurred and the sorcerers had to make a public admission that a higher power than they had caused this plague, i.e. אצבע אלו-הים היא, their esteem amongst the people declined further and is reflected In the missing letter י when we encounter the word חרטומם again in 8,16. When someone’s name is spelled defectively this is an allusion to that person’s lack of ability, of power. We find these sorcerers at the nadir of their erstwhile reputation in 9,11 during the plague of “infectious boils” when they are reported as “unable” to make an appearance in the presence of Pharaoh. They were simply ashamed of their impotence. Not only were they unable to protect their fellow citizens but they could not even protect themselves.

“To bring forth lice.” To create them from elsewhere. [Rashi is explaining:] Do not understand להוציא to mean that the sorcerers tried to remove the lice. Rashi knew this because it says “The sorcerers did likewise,” i.e., as Moshe and Aharon did.

V. 14. להוציא, siehe oben V. 4. Nachdem sie dreimal ihre Ohnmacht erprobt hatten, bekannten sie demütig: אצבע אלקי׳ היא, und traten auch nicht wieder auf. — אצבע אלקי׳: wie eine unmittelbar von Gott gesandte Plage נגע, eigentlich: Berührung heißt, so drückt der Satz אצבע א׳ היא dasselbe durch Finger, als das Organ der Berührung aus. Beidem liegt die Anschauung zu Grunde: Gewöhnliche Leiden lässt Gott durch Vermittlung der durch ihn bestehenden Naturordnung eintreten. Er tritt dabei nicht in unmittelbare Berührung mit dem Menschen. נגעים sind eben unmittelbare Berührungen des göttlichen Fingers. Gegen jene, wo direkt nur die Natur waltet, vermeinte die ägyptische Kunst oder gab vor, bewältigend wirken zu können. Vor der unmittelbaren Gottesmacht beugten sie sich ohne Scheu.

להוציא את הכננים, “to remove the lice and vermin;” seeing that the lice had lodged between the feet of the sorcerers and the ground, an area over which sorcery has no control. We have learned about this from something that happened at the time of Shimon ben Shetach (early part of the second Temple period) and the young men lifted these female sorcerers from the ground (Before executing them. Compare Jerusalem Talmud, tractate Chagigah second chapter, halachah 2) The three first plagues were, blood, frogs, and lice, were initiated by Aaron as they affected the earth. The three plagues of hail, locust, and darkness were initiated by Moses, as they originated in the celestial spheres, something over which Moses exercised a degree of control. The three plagues, of roaming beasts invading urban areas, the boils and the plague, were initiated by both G–d, Moses and Aaron jointly. (Tanchuma on this portion, section 14)

ולא יכלו BUT THEY COULD NOT — for the demon (through whose agency this was to be done) is powerless in the case of a creature smaller than a barley corn) (Sanhedrin 67b). Therefore they had to admit,

And there were lice. The Torah repeats these words (from v.13) to inform that they settled on the bodies of people and animals and bit them in the manner of lice, which do not swarm but are attached to the body. This is implied by the Midrash Tanchuma: “They entered the Egyptians’ bodies like arrows”.

ולא יכולו, “but they were unable.” Our sages find in this confirmation that the power of demons does not extend to creatures smaller than a grain of barley. Some commentators believe that the failure of the sorcerers lies in the fact that they are anchored in the habitat ”air, atmosphere,” are not part of the creatures who walk the surface of the earth, whereas the vermin are an integral part of earth itself, being generated inside the crust of the earth. Creatures that cannot walk the earth do not have dominion over creatures that originate within the earth.

ולא יכלו, “but they were unable.” Seeing that all the dust had turned into vermin from where would they produce similar kinds of vermin?A different explanation: seeing that the sorcerers could not duplicate the plague, they tried to get rid of it. But they failed. There would not have been any point in adding to the disaster, anyways. If they had succeeded in getting rid of the vermin, their fellow Egyptians would have been grateful to them and they would have risen in their esteem. Still another exegesis of the words: ולא יכלו; the sorcerers were unable to remain in the proximity of Pharaoh as they had been smitten with vermin also, and they were ashamed of their impotence and withdrew. The same thing happened again when they were struck by the 6th plague, infectious boils on the skin. [It is interesting that both the third and the sixth plague occurred without Moses having forewarned Pharaoh, so that the Egyptians could have denied that it was a plague sent by the G-d of the Israelites. Ed.] According to some opinions, when the sorcerers’ feet were not planted directly on the earth, their power disappeared. If so, this would explain why the Torah wrote “they were powerless,” as the entire surface of the earth was covered with vermin preventing them from standing on the ground. When the sorcerers perceived their inability to get rid of the vermin, they admitted that this must indeed be plague orchestrated by heavenly forces and they said: אצבע אלוהים היא that “this was a finger of G-d.” The reason of their inability could not have been that that their power was limited to creatures larger than a grain of barley as claimed by some, for if it were so, why were they not able to get rid of the fourth plague, the wild beasts roaming and destroying in urban areas at will?

ותהי הכנם באדם ובבהמה, ”and the vermin kept afflicting man and beast.´ The sorcerers themselves were also afflicted by this plague.

אצבע אלהים הוא THIS IS THE FINGER OF GOD — This plague is not caused by sorcery: it is of the Omnipresent God!

AND THE MAGICIANS SAID UNTO PHARAOH: THIS IS THE FINGER OF G-D. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that because the magicians had done as Aaron did with the serpent and also with the plagues of blood and the frogs and now they could not do so, they therefore said to Pharaoh: “This plague of gnats has not come through Aaron for the sake of Israel. Rather it is a plague of G-d due to the particular [evil] stars under which the land of Egypt found itself at the time.” Pharaoh did not deny the existence of the Creator¹⁴²See Ramban above in Seder Shemoth 5:3. but only the Divine Name which Moses mentioned to him. This is similar in sense to the verse, It was not His hand that smote us; it was a chance that happened to us.¹⁴³I Samuel 6:9. Therefore Pharaoh’s heart was hardened. And Ibn Ezra brought proof for his explanation from the fact that Scripture does not state that the magicians said, “This is the finger of the Eternal,” which would have been a reference to the G-d of Israel, just as Pharaoh said to Moses and Aaron, Entreat the Eternal.¹⁴⁴Verse 4. Another proof [which Ibn Ezra brought for his explanation] is that in the case of the smiting of the river, Moses had forewarned Pharaoh,¹⁴⁵Above 7:17-18. And so also was there a forewarning in the case of the frogs (ibid., Verses 27-29). but he mentioned nothing to him about the plague of gnats. [Therefore the magicians felt justified in saying that it was not a plague for the sake of Israel but merely due to the evil stars.]
Ibn Ezra’s interpretation does not appear to me to be correct. “A chance” is not called “the finger of G-d.” Only a plague which comes directly from Him as a form of punishment is called the hand of the Eternal¹⁴⁶I Samuel 5:9. and the finger of G-d, just as it is written in the verse which [Ibn Ezra] mentioned: It was not His hand that smote us.¹⁴³I Samuel 6:9. And it is furthermore written: And Israel saw the great hand;¹⁴⁷Further, 14:31. And the hand of the Eternal shall be against you;¹⁴⁸I Samuel 12:15 and ibid., 5:11. the hand of G-d was very heavy there.¹⁴⁸I Samuel 12:15 and ibid., 5:11. Moreover, in the next plague of swarms, as well as in the following ones, Pharaoh no longer called upon the magicians to stand before Moses to do the same things, even though there had been a forewarning of their coming!¹⁴⁹How then could Ibn Ezra say that because Moses had not forewarned Pharaoh of the coming of the gnats, the magicians said that the plague came through the evil stars and not from the Eternal? In the following plagues when Pharaoh was forewarned of their coming, why did he not call upon the magicians to do likewise? The answer must be, as Ramban explains, that in the case of the plague of the gnats, the magicians already admitted that it was from the Eternal and therefore they could not do likewise. There was thus no need for Pharaoh to call upon them in the following plagues of which he was forewarned, since those were surely from the Eternal, the G-d of Israel, before Whom the magicians were helpless.
But the subject, in accordance with the simple explanation of Scripture, is as follows: When the magicians saw that they could not bring forth the gnats, they admitted Aaron’s deed to be through an act of G-d, and this is why Pharaoh no longer called upon them from that time on. They [the magicians] said, This is ‘the finger’ of G-d, and not “the hand” of G-d [as is the customary way of the Scriptures to refer to plagues, as e.g., It was not His ‘hand’ that smote us]¹⁴³I Samuel 6:9. in order to minimize the plague, that is to say, it is but a small plague from Him [which we can easily endure].¹⁵⁰In his Discourse “The Law of the Eternal is Perfect,” Ramban adds: “Nevertheless the magicians [thereby] admitted [that it was an act of G-d], and thus they became apprised of the fact that Moses’ deed was effectuated by the Lord of the universe.” They did not, however, say to Pharaoh, “This is the finger of ‘the Eternal,’” [but instead they said, “This is the finger of ‘G-d’”]. Pharaoh and his servants would not mention the Proper Divine Name except when speaking to Moses because he mentioned that Name to them. [In addressing Pharaoh, however, the magicians would not use that Name since that would be an open recognition on their part of His existence and power. Therefore they said to Pharaoh, “ This is the finger of ' G-d, ’” although their intent was to say, “This is the finger of ‘the Eternal.’ “] That the magicians could not bring forth the gnats was [not because they really could not do it, but it] was by reason of the fact that G-d so caused it to happen to them. He confounded their counsel in accordance with His Will, for everything is His and it is within His power to do all.
It appears to me further that in the first two plagues — in the one of blood, where the water naturally¹⁵¹Since water and blood are both liquids, the change of the one into the other may be spoken of as in “the nature” of things inasmuch as both are classified under the element of water. See above, Note 117, on the four elements. changed into blood, and in the one of the frogs, which consisted of bringing them up from the river — since they did not involve the creation of some new phenomenon out of nothing or some act of new formation,¹⁵²The Hebrew text reads: bri’ah o yetzirah. See Vol. I, p. 23, that only the term bara (or bri’ah) signifies “bringing forth something from nothing.” the magicians could do [as Aaron did]. Scripture does not say, “and the frogs came into existence,” but only, and the frogs came up;¹⁵³Verse 2. they assembled and came up. In the plague of gnats, however, there was an act of creation, for it is not in the nature of dust to turn into gnats. Therefore He said, that it may become gnats.¹⁵⁴Verse 12. The word “become” suggests a new act of creation. The verse, And the magicians did so with their secret arts to bring forth gnats,¹⁵⁵Verse 14. is similar in intent to: Let the earth bring forth the living creature, etc., and it was so.¹⁵⁶Genesis 1:24. In other words, the expression here, “to bring forth the gnats,” means a new act of creation, just as in the Book of Genesis. But only the Creator, praised and magnified be He, can perform such a [new] act of creation. The verse, And the magicians did so…but they could not,¹⁵⁵Verse 14. means they incanted the demons to do their command, but they were powerless.
Confirming me in my opinion concerning the frogs, [i.e., that there was no new act of creation there], is the following text [of the Talmud]:¹⁵⁷Sanhedrin 67b. ‘Rabbi Akiba said that there was only one frog¹⁵⁸As Verse 2 has it: ‘Vata’al hatz’phardei’a’ (and the frog came up), in the singular. which swarmed and filled the whole land of Egypt. Rabbi Eliezer¹⁵⁹“Eliezer.” In our text of the Gemara, “Eleazar,” and so also further in Ramban. ben Azaryah said to him: ‘Akiba, what have you to do with Agadah (homily)? Turn from these matters and go instead to [delve in the difficulties of] Negaim¹⁶⁰Negaim (Leprosies) is the name of a treatise in the Mishnah dealing with the laws of leprosy. It is considered a very difficult subject. and Oholoth.¹⁶¹Oholoth (Tents) is one of the most difficult treatises of the Mishnah. It deals with the laws regarding the uncleanness of a corpse as affecting a house and its vessels, as well as human beings. It was only one frog croaking to all other frogs, and so they gathered.’” Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah could not accept the opinion [of Rabbi Akiba] that the magicians should have been able to bestow a new nature upon the frog, i.e., that one frog should give birth to so many, which is contrary to its nature, but rather they gathered them in order to bring them up. In the opinion then of Rabbi Akiba, the verse And the river shall swarm with frogs,¹⁶²Above, 7:28. means that the river should swarm with them more than its due. But according to Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryah, the sense of that verse is like, ‘shirtzu’ in the earth,¹⁶³Genesis 9:7. Said to Noah and his sons. which connotes movement, as I have explained in Seder Bereshith,¹⁶⁴Ibid., 1:20 (Vol. I, pp. 47-48). and here its meaning is that the frogs gather and move about in the river and from there go up upon Egypt.
Now with regard to the gnats, our Rabbis have said¹⁶⁵Sanhedrin 67 b, and mentioned by Rashi here in Verse 14. that the demon [through whose power this was to be done by the magicians] is powerless in the case of a creature that is smaller than a lentil.¹⁶⁶“Lentil.” In our text of the Gemara, as well as in Rashi here: “a barley-corn.” At any rate, it was completely unnecessary for Scripture to inform us that the magicians could not bring forth gnats, as these are creatures smaller in size than a barley-corn. The expression, but they could not, must hence mean as explained in the text. Such is Ramban’s intent as explained by Rabbeinu Bachya. See my Hebrew commentary, p. 313. The expression, but they could not, must therefore mean that they could not assemble gnats from their [breeding] places and bring them.
In Midrash Rabbah, the Rabbis have further said:¹⁶⁷Shemoth Rabbah 10:7. “Perceiving that they cannot bring forth the gnats, the magicians at once recognized that [Aaron’s deed] was an act of G-d and not an act of the demons. From that moment on, therefore, they were no longer anxious to liken themselves to Moses by bringing forth the plagues.”
Now with regard to Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra’s statement that Moses did not inform them of the coming of the plague of gnats, it appears to me that Aaron struck [the dust of the earth] with the rod in the sight of Pharaoh, just as he did in the case of the soot of the furnace.¹⁶⁸Further, 9:8. In other words, just as in the case of boils it is said that it was done in the sight of the king, so also in the case of gnats, where the verse reads, And Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod and smote the dust of the earth (Verse 13), it was done in the sight of the king. However, there was no forewarning here, since the Holy One, blessed be He, warned Pharaoh only of those plagues which entailed the death of people. In the case of the frogs, [there was also death involved], as it is written: And [He sent among them] frogs, which destroyed them,¹⁶⁹Psalms 78:45. which is an allusion to death or to the kind of destruction mentioned by our Rabbis,¹⁷⁰Shemoth Rabbah 10:4. i.e., that the frogs made them impotent. Similarly, [He warned him of] the locusts, [which destroyed the crops], because it would cause the Egyptians to die of hunger, for they ate up the residue of that which escaped, which remaineth unto you from the hail.¹⁷¹Further, 10:5. All this reflects His mercies towards man, just as it is said, Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it, and he turn not from his way; he shall die in his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul.¹⁷²Ezekiel 33:9. Therefore, He did not warn Pharaoh of the plagues of gnats, boils, and darkness, [as these did not entail the loss of human lives]. He warned him¹⁷³Further, 9:3-4. only of the pestilence of cattle because it involved death which should have taken effect also on man, as He told him afterward, For now I might have stretched out My hand and I might have smitten thee and thy people with pestilence. But in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up, etc.¹⁷⁴Ibid., Verses 15-16. Therefore He informed him of what was to happen.
In the case of certain plagues, [i.e., blood, swarms, and hail], G-d said to Moses, Rise up early in the morning … lo he cometh forth to the water.¹⁷⁵The three verses are mentioned by Ramban more fully later in the text. Here he mentions the text in a general way although it is based on Verse 16 here. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture,¹⁷⁶Rashi commented (above, 7:15): “Lo, he goeth forth unto the water to ease himself. Pharaoh claimed to be a god and asserted that [because of his divine powers], he did not need to ease himself. Therefore he would rise early and go forth to the Nile to ease himself in secret.” This interpretation of Rashi which is based upon a Midrash (Tanchuma Va’eira, 14) is alluded to by Ramban’s words that his own explanation is “in line with the plain meaning of Scripture,” thus implying that there is a Midrashic or homiletic interpretation of the verse, namely, that of Rashi mentioned above. this was the time when the kings were wont to go forth in the morning to enjoy themselves in the waters, and the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded Moses to go there. The reason for it is that since the plague of blood was the first one [of the plagues], He wanted Moses to do it in the sight of the king and without fear of him. This is the sense of the expression, and thou shalt place thyself towards him.¹⁷⁷Above, 7:15, in the case of the first plague. Similarly, in the plague of swarms it is said, Rise up early in the morning, and stand before Pharaoh; lo, he cometh forth to the water,¹⁷⁸Here in Verse 16. and also in the case of hail it is said, Rise up early in the morning and stand before Pharaoh,¹⁷⁹Further, 9:13. which likewise took place when the king went forth to the water. He wanted these two plagues to be wrought [at that particular time] because since swarms and hail brought death and punishment upon the people, the Holy One, blessed be He, wanted the warning to be given in the sight of all people. When the king went forth to the water, a multitude of people followed him, and when Moses will then forewarn him in their sight, perhaps they might plead with their master to return from his evil way. In case they do not do so, they will deserve punishment. But in the case of the other plagues, the warning given to the king alone was sufficient, and therefore in connection with them it is said, Go in unto Pharaoh,¹⁸⁰Above, 7:26 (in the plague of frogs); further, 9:1 (pestilence), and 10:1 (locusts). meaning that Moses was to go into the palace. In the case of gnats and boils, it does not say [that Moses was to go into the palace] because Aaron had to strike the dust of the earth [to bring on the plague of the gnats], and in the king’s palace there is no dust, as it has a pavement of green and white marble.¹⁸¹Esther 1:6. In the case of boils, Moses had to throw the soot of the furnace heavenward.¹⁸²Further, 9:10. Thus [we must say that] these two plagues, [i.e., gnats and boils], were done in the sight of Pharaoh when he was in the court of the garden of the king’s palace,¹⁸³Esther 1:5. or some similar place.

אצבע אלוקים הוא, this is a natural disaster [the word אל-הים equaling 86 numerically, the same as הטבע=“nature” Ed.] They denied that this plague, which had not been advertised beforehand, was the work of Moses and Aaron whom they had considered superior sorcerers, but had been orchestrated by the god of nature. They argued that if this had been a work of sorcerers they too could have duplicated the phenomenon.

ויאמרו החרטומים אצבע אלוקים הוא, “The sorcerers said that it was manifestation of a ‘finger’ of G’d.” Ibn Ezra wrote that far from admitting that Moses and Aaron were superior to them, seeing that thus far they had been able to match Moses and Aaron plague for plague, they now attributed this plague directly to a natural phenomenon, i.e. part of nature and its cycles, and as not related even remotely to the situation of the Israelites. [the fact that Moses had not given any warning of this plague helped convince Pharaoh that his sorcerers were right. Ed.] Pharaoh had never denied the existence of elokim the Creator, he had only refused to acknowledge the existence of the attribute Hashem, and the special relationship of that attribute to the Israelites, as “HIS” people. Ibn Ezra cites the fact that the sorcerers did not say: אצבע ה' אלוקים הוא, “it is a manifestation of the finger of Hashem elokim, although even Pharaoh had begged Moses to entreat Hashem to remove the plague of frogs, as proof of their being far from acknowledging the phenomenon Hashem. Nachmanides writes that in his opinion Ibn Ezra is not correct, seeing that the Torah would not refer to a plague as אצבע אלוקים, unless such a plague was a clear indication that it occurred as a Divine punishment, not as a random event, part of astrologically predictable “normal” phenomena. Expressions such as “G’d’s finger, G’d’s hand, G’d’s arm,” are always reserved for manifestations of G’d’s direct intervention in the affairs of man, not natural phenomena which could have occurred at any time without reference to specific events known to man. He quotes such examples as Exodus 14,31, Samuel I 12,15, Samuel I 5,11 as support for this thesis. Furthermore, the very fact that the Torah reports that the sorcerers were themselves afflicted to the extent that they had to leave Pharaoh’s presence, would make any claim that this was not a Divine manifestation related to the Israelites’ continued enslavement quite unlikely. Seeing that the sorcerers ceased playing any role, as Pharaoh did not summon them to try and get rid of the plague of wild beasts, a plague that he had been forewarned about, shows that Pharaoh by then was isolated in his obstinacy, knowing that the sorcerers would be of no help to him at all. The sorcerers had referred to “a finger of G’d,” in order to minimize the awe in which G’d would be held on account of a minor plague such as the vermin. We do not find that Pharaoh and his advisors ever referred to G’d as Hashem, except when they were in the presence of Moses and Aaron. This was mere lip service, as they did not want to aggravate their relations with Moses who had proven capable of not only orchestrating a plague but also of causing it to stop. As to Ibn Ezra’s argument that Moses and Aaron had not given warning of this plague, this is only technically so, as no doubt they had struck the earth while being in the presence of Pharaoh, and this clearly was meant to bring forth the vermin. To attribute such a plague of vermin to “natural” atmospheric phenomena would hardly be believable to anyone. If, in apparent contradiction to the above, we find that the Torah describes the sorcerers as so afflicted by the plague of boils, (#6) that “they were unable to remain in the presence of Moses,” (9,11) the Torah does not mention this because the sorcerers had come to duplicate the plague of boils, but because the Torah had stated that in spite of this very painful plague, something which should have given Pharaoh food for thought, the Torah wants to illustrate how painful this plague was by stating that even the sorcerers who had their reputation at stake, could not maintain a posture during that plague. If the sorcerers could not maintain a posture, how far less could any other Egyptian, excepting Pharaoh, of course. The Torah therefore explains that if Pharaoh remained steadfast this was only because G’d had given him the strength to do so. ויחזק ה' את לב פרעה. (9,12)

ויאמרו החרטומם אל פרעה, “the sorcerers said to Pharaoh.” Up until this point the word חרטומים had always been spelled with the letter י. Now that they had been forced to admit their incompetence that letter was dropped. According to Kidushin 40 the absence of the letter י is an allusion to the proverb that of the ten units of magic G’d had allocated to the creatures on earth, nine had been appropriated by the Egyptians, whereas the remaining unit was dispersed all over the globe.

“This is the finger of God.” They did not have in mind the God of Israel, for if they did, they should have said, “This is the finger of Adonoy,” or “the finger of the God of Israel.” This was due to the fact that this plague occurred without warning, and so they believed it was not from Hashem for the sake of the Jews, for if it was, Moshe should have delivered a warning beforehand. Therefore, they said this plague originated from the gods of Egypt. As a result: “But Pharaoh’s heart remained hardened,” he was no longer fearful at all.

אצבע אלו־הים היא, “It is a natural phenomenon. If this plague had been caused by Moses and Aaron, we could also have done the same. [i.e. this plague is orchestrated by the G-d of Joseph, who had been known to them as elohim, as opposed to Hashem whom Moses and Aaron had claimed to represent. Ed.]

כאשר דבר ה׳ AS THE LORD HAD SPOKEN — when He said, (Exodus 7:4) “Pharaoh will not hearken unto you”.

אצבע אלו־הים היא, “it is a (finger) feminine phenomenon”. [היא means “she”. Ed.] The sorcerers excused their inability to deal with this plague to the fact that it was something natural, and therefore not within their domain.

ויחזק לב פרעה, “Pharaoh’s heart remained stubborn, strong.” The reason why Pharaoh did not ask Moses to pray for the removal of this plague was that this would have been an admission that it was a heavenly phenomenon. [Besides thus far none of the plagues had caused deaths, only inconvenience. He felt that if this is all that Hashem can do, he could live with it. Ed.] There was a good reason to feel that a plague which was common among the poor people all the time, had spread for some reason beyond its normal boundaries. Pharaoh did not realise that the absence of a warning meant that this was not of Moses’ doing; in fact the reason why he had not been warned was that he had ignored the warnings issued before the first two plagues, so that this was the punishment for having ignored those two plagues to influence his attitude toward the Israelite slaves. Moreover, every group of three plagues, as pointed out by Rabbi Yehudah who characterised (summarised) them as acronyms, i.e. דצ׳ך, עד׳ש, באח׳ב, was also introduced by Moses as having a specific objective.(Compare Exodus 8,6: למען תדע כי אין כה׳ אלוקינו “so that you will realise that there is no G-d like our G-d.” Exodus 8,18: למען תדע כי אני ה׳ בקרב הארץ, “so that you will realise that I am the Lord right here on earth also.” Exodus 9,29: למען תדע כי לה׳ הארץ, “so that you will realise that the earth belongs to the Lord.”) Some commentators explain that the reason Rabbi Yehudah summarised the plagues as he did, was to remind us that this was the correct order, as compared to Psalms 78,44-51 where they are listed in a different sequence. Also in Psalms 105, 28-36 they are listed in a different order.

V. 16. Mit diesem Satze beginnt die zweite Gruppe: עד׳׳ש. Sie beginnt wieder mit einer גרות-Plage, die, nur in erhöhtem Maße, zum Bewusstsein bringen sollte, dass ihr Bleiben im Lande selbst nur von dem Willen des allmächtigen Gottes abhänge. Oben hieß es, Mosche sollte hinausgehen und Pharao am Wasser erwarten; denn dort galt es eben zunächst diesem Gotte, dem Nil, um dessen Abhängigkeit von dem Alleinen zu zeigen. Hier heißt es, Mosche soll seinem Hinausgehen zuvorkommen, soll ihn in seinem Hause aufsuchen, damit ihm gegenwärtig werde, es könne Fluss und Boden — Vater und Mutter Ägyptens — in ihrer Natur unverändert bleiben, und — so es Gottes Wille ist — sei doch für die Ägypter kein Bleiben im Lande.

משליח בך means I WILL INCITE AGAINST THEE. Another example is. (Deuteronomy 32:24) “I will incite (אשלח) the tooth of beasts against them”, where it signifies letting loose an animal against a person; old French inciter. English to incite.

והערוב, I believe that the Torah describes different kinds of wolves that are known by the word ,ערוב seeing that it is their habit to hunt at night as we know from Jeremiah 5,6. as well as from Tzefaniah 3,3. The fact that the wolf sets out when it gets dark, in the evening, and does not return until morning, is why this animal is referred to as ערוב, describing its habits.

וגם האדמה אשר הם עליה, a reference to the soil on which the houses stood which would become full of snakes and other creepers of the kind that inhabit the lower levels of the earth beneath its surface. The plague would result in the Egyptians feeling insecure in their homes even when they had shut every exit tightly.

ומלאו בתי מצרים את הערוב, the houses of Egypt will be filled with wild beasts, etc. The reason the Torah repeats the word הערוב, "the wild beasts," is that the houses will be filled with the wild beasts; if the Torah had merely written once: "the wild beasts will fill the houses of Egypt," we would have thought that the purpose of the plague was simply to fill the Egyptians' houses with wild beasts; this was not so, however, as the Torah had already stated: "I will send the wild beasts against you, your servants, your people as well as against your houses;" the obvious meaning is that the beasts were to cause damage and destruction. As it is, the additional message is that the houses would literally be filled with wild beasts.

וגם האדמה אשר הם עליה “including the ground they are on.” This includes the areas that did not have houses on them.

There is a reason in aggadic writings. . . Rashi is answering the question: Why did Hashem afflict Egypt with a swarm of animals from which they will benefit from the hides, meat, etc? Therefore Rashi explains: “There is a reason in aggadic writings. . .” (Found written in the name of the Mahara”d)

V. 17. שלח .הנני משליח im Kal heißt: jemanden oder etwas nach einem Ziele hinsenden, ohne dass in dem Gesendeten ein dorthin gerichtetes Streben ist. Im Piel: שַלֵחַ heißt es vielmehr: jemanden oder etwas der von ihm, dem zu Bewegenden, gewollten Richtung überlassen. Der Impuls liegt mehr in dem Gesendeten, als in dem Sendenden. Der Hiphil, wie hier, kommt eigentümlicher Weise nur bei Plagen vor, und scheint beide Begriffe kombiniert zu enthalten. Es ist die Absicht des Sendenden und sie trifft mit dem natürlichen Streben des zu Sendenden zusammen. So speziell hier beim ערוב .ערוב ist nicht eine Mischung von Tieren. Dagegen spricht schon der Artikel ה־. Es gibt ja keine bestimmte Mischung von Tieren. Vielmehr scheint ערוב von dem Begriff ערבה, die Wüste, gebildet zu sein und das Wüstentier zu bedeuten. Die Wüste heißt aber im Gegensatz zu der von Menschen bewohnten Welt: ערבה, entweder weil dort, von menschlichem Standpunkte betrachtet, alles in ungeordneter Mischung aufwächst, oder es dort kein geschiedenes Eigentum gibt, alles herrenlos allen gehört. Die Tiere der Wüste haben an sich den Mut, Menschen anzugreifen, es ist nur Gottes Wille, der ihnen Scheu vor dem Menschen eingeflößt, und nur durch diese Scheu ist es möglich, der menschlichen Kultur immer größere Strecken zu gewinnen. Diese Scheu nimmt Gott hinweg und zeigt: es können der Nil und die Fruchtbarkeit des Bodes ganz unverändert bleiben und dennoch die Bewohner, die sich Autochthonen dünken, fort müssen. Ganz Ägypten ist doch nur eine der Wüste abgerungene Oase. Gott winkt, und es dringt ihnen die Wüste ins Land. —

את הערב this means all kinds of wild beasts, serpents, and scorpions (a mixture [ערב] of noxious creatures) in a crowd (Exodus Rabbah 11:3) — these played havoc with them. There is a reason given in the Midrash in the case of each plague why this particular one and why that: God came against them with the tactics of warlike operations as carried out by kings in orderly sequence: a government (monarch) who is besieging a city first destroys its water supply, then they blow the trumpets and sound an alarm in order to terrify and dismay them — thus [their water supply was turned into blood], the frogs croaked and made a noise etc. - just as you will find it stated in the Midrash of Rabbi Tanchuma 2:3:4.

Another meaning of the words את הערוב the second time could be that had the Torah not repeated these words we would have assumed that the plague would have exhausted its purpose as soon as the houses of the Egyptians had become full of wild beasts; however, this was not the full extent of the plague. There were so many wild beasts that they could not be accomodated even after they had already filled all the houses of the Egyptians. This is why the Torah added: "and also the ground whereon they are."

וגם האדמה kann nur vom Standpunkte des Menschen gesprochen sein, dem Tiere der Wüste ist der Aufenthalt auf dem Felde noch natürlicher als in den Häusern. Allein es wird gesagt: die Tiere werden euch aus euren Häusern, ja aus euren Feldern treiben, und wenn ihr ihnen entgehen wollt, bleibt euch nichts übrig, als mit ihnen zu tauschen und vor dem Tier der Wüste in die Wüste zu flüchten.

והפליתי means I WILL SEPARATE. Similar is, (Exodus 9:4) “And the Lord will make a separation (והפלה)”; so, also, (Deuteronomy 30:11) “It is not נפלאת from thee״ — that is, “it is not separated and set at a far distance from thee”.

AND I WILL SET APART IN THAT DAY THE LAND OF GOSHEN. Due to the fact that the first plagues were not migratory in nature, it was no wonder that they were confined to the land of Egypt and were not to be in the land of Goshen, [Israel’s habitation].¹⁸⁴Genesis 47:15. But this [plague of swarms] was a migratory plague. Thus when the wild beasts came up from the lions’ dens, from the mountains of the leopards,¹⁸⁵Song of Songs 4:8. and brought ruin upon the whole land of Egypt, it was natural that they also come into the land of Goshen, which contained some of the best of the land of Egypt.¹⁸⁶See Genesis 47:6, where the land of Goshen is referred to as the best of the land of Egypt. Therefore it was necessary for Him to say, And I will set apart in that day the land of Goshen, so that it would be completely saved [from the wild beasts] because My people dwell in it, as the majority of its inhabitants were Israelites.
And I will put ‘p’duth’ (a division) between My people and thy people.¹⁸⁷Verse 19. The intent thereof is that even in the land of Egypt, if the beasts will find a certain Jew, they will not harm him. Instead they will devour the Egyptians, as it is written: He sent among them swarms of beasts, which devoured them.¹⁸⁸Psalms 78:45. This is the sense of the word ‘p’duth’ between My people and thy people, which is similar to the verse, I have given Egypt as thy ransom, Ethiopia and Seba for thee.¹⁸⁹Isaiah 43:3.

והפלאתי ביום ההוא, seeing that these wild beasts are fleet-footed and would invade any kingdom without regard to international borders once the plague has been released, the Torah had to stress that it would be observed that these animals would respect the unfenced areas in which the Jews were living as if they were physical obstacles. The same phenomenon would be observed when the “natural” disaster which struck the herds under the heading of דבר, the fifth plague, did not infect a single animal owned by the Israelites.

והפלאתי ביום ההוא, “I shall set apart on that day, etc.” There is no doubt that all the other plagues did not afflict the Israelites either. The reason why the Torah mentions that the land of Goshen would not be invaded by the wild beasts, is that once wild beasts are allowed to roam freely, it could have been expected that they would not know how to distinguish between areas inhabited by Egyptians and districts predominately populated by Israelites. The Torah had made a similar comment during the plague of pestilence (#5) stating that not a single Jew became afflicted with that disease. There too, we would have expected the microbes not to have known how to make a detour around the Israelites. In the case of the fourth plague, although there may have been a few Egyptians living in the province of Goshen, the fact that it was populated in the main by Israelites, appears to have protected the few Egyptians there. [this in turn might have stiffened Pharaoh’s attitude, as he was searching desperately for an excuse that these were natural disasters, not vengeance by the Jewish G’d. Ed.]

והפלאתי ביום ההוא , “I shall set apart on that day, etc.” The fact that the first three plagues occurred in the land of Egypt without affecting the province of Goshen was not so remarkable due to the nature of the plagues. The manifestations of those plagues were more or less local in nature. Seeing that the plague of wild beasts originated far from civilized areas of Egypt, it was remarkable that the beasts should distinguish between areas inhabited by Israelites and areas inhabited by Egyptians. It was therefore an act of G’d to redirect the instinct of the beasts so that they ignored Israelites and their dwellings.
אשר עמי עומד עליה, “on which My people are standing.” This means: “in order to enable My people to maintain itself on it.”

V. 18. So werdet ihr ins Exil müssen und gerade die, die ihr als גרים, als die Unberechtigten im Lande behandelt habt, werden auf ihrem Boden unbelästigt bleiben. — פלח ,פלה פלא: scharf und entschieden von allem andern sondern, daher einerseits: spalten, andererseits von Ereignissen: Wunder, das außer allem ursächlichen Zusammenhange, unmittelbar nur durch Gott Geschehende. — בקרב הארץ: du sollst erkennen, dass ich nicht nur über der Erde, etwa nur in unerreichbarer Höhe über die Verhältnisse im allgemeinen gebiete, sondern auch unmittelbar auf Erden die Verhältnisse unterscheide und nach meinem Willen lenke.

למען תדע כי אני ה׳ בקרב הארץ IN ORDER THAT THOU MAYEST KNOW THAT I AM THE ETERNAL IN THE MIDST OF THE EARTH — although My Shechina is in the heavens My command is fulfilled amongst mankind (as we might say, “My writ runs on earth also”).

I AM THE ETERNAL IN THE MIDST OF THE EARTH. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained it as being a figure of speech, emblematic of the nature of kings to establish their seat of government in the center of the kingdom in order to be near to the remote comers thereof. This explanation makes no sense. Rather, its intent is to state that He rules and supervises in the midst of the earth, and not, as some think, that thick clouds are a covering to Him, that He seeth not; and He walketh in the circuit of heaven.¹⁹⁰Job 22:14. It is possible that the sense of the expression is similar to the verse, For My name is in him,¹⁹¹Further, 23:21. and the secret thereof is sublime and recondite.¹⁹²See my Hebrew commentary, p. 314, that the allusion here is to the Cabalistic term of “the upper earth.” See Ramban to Genesis 1:5 (Vol. I, pp. 35-38).

כי אני ה' בקרב הארץ, “that I, the Lord, am also G’d in the midst of the land.” Ibn Ezra writes that it was customary in those days that the kings would make their residence in the centre of their land, so as to be equidistant from most of their subjects. They felt that just as man’s heart is located centrally within his body, so the place of a king has to be in the center of his realm.

ושמתי פדות AND I WILL MAKE A DELIVERANCE which shall serve as a division BETWEEN MY PEOPLE AND THY PEOPLE.

ושמתי פדות, a word describing “separation.” Words such as ישועה, הצלה, חלצה, פורקן are all expressions denoting different separations, isolation of one thing from another.

ושמתי פדות בין עמי ובין עמך, so that even the few members of my people who might be in an area infested by the arov would not be molested by these beasts. The same beasts would harm your people on the same spot.

ושמתי פדות, "I shall set apart, etc." G'd meant that not only would the wild beasts respect the boundary of the province of Goshen and not invade that province, they would not even approach those Israelites that happened to be outside the province of Goshen at the time. The Torah made this clear by the nuance "between My people and between your people." This means that whenever members of both people were found next to one another, only the Egyptians would be bothered by the wild beasts. The beasts would not bite a Jew.

ושמתי פדות בין עמי ובין עמך, “I will place a deliberate distinction between My people and between your people.” This means that even if an Israelite will find himself in an Egyptian neighbourhood at the time when the beasts invade urban areas, they will not harm a single Israelite.

ושמתי פדת בין עמי ובין עמך, “I will make a distinction between My people and between your people.” G’d (Moses) had already mentioned that He would make a distinction between Goshen and the rest of the country. The additional information in this verse meant that even within Egypt proper the wild beasts would not attack the Israelites or their belongings. We have confirmation of this in Psalms 78,48 where Assaph (a contemporary of the event) said: ”He inflicted upon them swarms of wild beasts to devour them.” The word פדות is also related to “ransom.” Isaiah 43,3 speaks about G’d giving a “ransom” to Egypt (in return for releasing the Jewish people). The word is spelled defective in our verse, i.e. without the letter ו, indicating that the redemption from Egypt was not a total redemption as it was followed by other periods of enslavement of the Jewish people. When Psalms 111,9 speaks about פדות שלח לעמו, “He has sent redemption to His people,” the word פדות is spelled plene indicating that David speaks about the redemption of the future.

V. 19. פדה ,פדות: etwas, das seiner natürlichen, sittlichen oder sozialen Beschaffenheit nach bereits in die Macht eines andern verfallen ist, aus dieser hervorheben (verwandt mit פתח, auch mit בדה: etwas äußern, was in Wirklichkeit keine Existenz hat). Dies Unberührtbleiben von der allgemeinen Kalamität, der sie als die wehrlos Preisgegebenen am ersten hätten verfallen müssen, wird das Unterscheidungsmerkmal sein zwischen עמי und עמך, zwischen Menschen, die sich nur auf Menschenmacht stützen, und Menschen, die sich ausschließlich Gott unterordnen und hingeben. מחר: bei diesen und bei den folgenden Plagen, wie sich Pharao oben erbeten, damit es nicht als natürliches Ereignis scheine. אות, es ist ein belehrendes Zeichen, kein מופת, kein ענוי.

למחר יהיה, “it will occur tomorrow.” Moses does not want to give Pharaoh the excuse that the disappearance of the frogs, i.e. their deaths will be accidental, unplanned. The same happened with the plague of pestilence (#7) when G-d predicted precisely when it would occur. (Compare 9,5)

למחר יהיה. This will occur on the morrow. Moses announced the timing so that Pharaoh would not attribute the phenomenon to mere chance.

תשחת הארץ means the ground was being destroyed (the imperfect tense denotes what was then going on continuously), and so the Targum has אתחבלת ארעא (the participle) the ground was being ruined.

תשחת הארץ, the land was ruined. This means that the beasts would destroy everything except the human beings.

אתחבלת ארעא (past tense). Rashi is answering the question: Why is [it written] תשחת הארץ a term that denotes the future tense, if the land had already been devastated? Therefore Rashi cites Onkelos, who explains the term as אתחבלת ארעא , to prove that this term also denotes the past or present tense.

זבחו לאלהיכם בארץ SACRIFICE TO YOUR GOD IN THE LAND, in the place where you are, and do not go into the wilderness.

Where you are, and do not go into the wilderness. Rashi is answering the question: [Since בארץ implies anywhere on earth, what is Pharaoh saying?] Would they sacrifice in heaven? Therefore Rashi explains: “Do not go into the wilderness,” for they had requested to go into the wilderness to sacrifice to Hashem.

V. 21. Eigentümlich ויקרא אל־ ול־. Jemanden rufen lassen, heißt in der Regel קרא ל־, nach jemandem rufen, einen dritten beauftragen, ihn vor sich zu bringen. קרא אל kommt nur selten und immer bedeutsam vor. Es stellt den zu Rufenden in eine viel selbständigere Stellung. Pharao ließ an Mosche den Ruf ergehen, den Wunsch äußern, dass er ihn sprechen möchte, wobei es denn ganz Mosche freiem Willen verblieb, ob er diesem Wunsche nachkommen wollte. Er ließ ihm aber zugleich sagen, wenn er komme, möchte er Aaron mitbringen. Es tritt hier klar hervor, wie Pharao ganz richtig Mosches und Aarons Stellung zu einander begriffen und gewürdigt.

זבחו לאלוקיכם בארץ, “offer meat offerings to your G-d inside the land of Egypt!” When Pharaoh saw that G-d made clear distinctions between where the plagues that occurred where the Israelites lived and where not, he made the first concession allowing them to offer sacrifices inside Egypt so that their G-d would not punish them.

תועבת מצרים THE ABOMINATION OF THE EGYPTIANS — This means: that which the Egyptians reverence (their idol), just as, (2 Kings 23:13) “and for Milcom the abomination (תועבת) of the children of Ammon”, but in relation to the Israelites it (Scripture) calls it תועבה. We may explain these words in another sense also: תועבת מצרים — The act of sacrifice which we practise is a hateful thing to the Egyptians seing that we sacrifice their god (sheep which were reverenced as gods in Egypt).

כי תועבת מצרים, sheep were something despicable in the eyes of the Egyptians.

כי תועבת מצרים, “for it is an abomination in the eyes of the Egyptians;” some commentators claim that this line is a comment added to the Torah by Moses, seeing he wanted to take a swipe at idolatry. When confronting Pharaoh in person, Moses referred to their deities as אלוהי מצרים, and not as תועבה. The reason Moses was provoked to refer to the Egyptians’ deities by a derogatory term was that they worshipped the image of a lamb.

When speaking to Israel is it called abominable. I.e., Moshe called it abominable when speaking to Yisrael, but not when speaking to Egypt.

V. 22. תועבת מצרים: ein im Munde Mosche Pharao gegenüber schwer zu erklärender Ausdruck. Entweder: das, was wir bei Mizrajim als Götter verabscheuen, oder: was Mizrajim bei uns als Opfer verabscheut, oder es ist ein Höflichkeitsausdruck aus Rücksicht für Pharao, statt: was Mizrajim aufs höchste verehrt. Jedenfalls kennzeichnet es das Judentum bedeutsam in seiner Stellung zum antiken und modernen Heidentum. Dasjenige, dem die andern Völker sich opferten, das opfert der Jude seinem Gott. Die Götter der anderen Völker sind die gewaltigen Naturkräfte, denen der Mensch unterliegt, sowie die mächtige Naturkraft in seinem Innern, welcher der Mensch erliegt; die Gewalten um sich und in sich vergöttern sie und geben sich ihnen machtlos hin. Der Jude aber tötet ihre Repräsentanten in seinem Opfer und bringt sich zum Bewusstsein, wie er auch Macht habe über die Naturkraft in seinem Innern, und in der freien Bewältigung und Hingebung derselben an den freien Allmächtigen, Alleinen, zugleich durch diesen dem Bereiche aller blinden äußeren Naturgewalt entzogen wird. Er opfert den Götzen in seinem Innern und bricht damit zugleich die Fessel aller äußeren Naturbewältigung.

ולא יסקלונו, “are they not going to stone us to death?” The expression סקל means throwing stones; we know this from Samuel II 16,6: where David and his men were stoned by Shimi, a family member of King Shaul, who had been dead for while already.

ולא יסקלנו — This must be read in the intonation of a question (although there is no interrogative prefix הֲ) AND WILL THEY NOT STONE US?

ולא יסקלונו?, a question. Stoning was considered as something despicable, a demeaning treatment of people, as we know from Samuel II 16,13 where Shimi ben Gerah cursed David and threw stones at him.

It would be despicable to Egypt. . . I.e., the word תועבה means “something despicable.” Accordingly, Moshe is saying this to the Egyptians themselves.

דרך שלשת ימים נלך במדבר, we will go a distance of three days’ march into the desert;” in fact this is what they did at the Exodus when they made camp on the second day at the edge of the desert, as is described in detail in Exodus 13,20.

לא תרחיקו לכת. "Do not go very far." Pharaoh meant: "not as far as the three days you have requested." His argument was that if Moses was afraid the Egyptians would stone the Israelites if they slaughtered animals the Egyptians regarded as sacred, there was no reason to travel a distance of three days to escape that particular danger. Apparently, Moses did not make an issue of this at this time; he reasoned that the Israelites' major purpose was to get out of the urban areas, no matter how far. If Pharaoh would pursue them, Moses was certain that G'd would deal with him. At that point Moses wanted only to ensure that Pharaoh would not have a reason to renege on his promise; this is why he warned Pharaoh not to deal deceitfully with him and the Jewish people. He emphasized this by use of the word רק. Moses meant that though they would travel for a distance of less than three days the important thing for them was to get out of town for a while.

העתירו בעדי, “entreat for me!” Ibn Ezra writes that the words העתירו בעדי should by rights, have been written at the beginning of this verse. Pharaoh’s intent was that as a result of Moses and Aaron entreating G’d on behalf of Pharaoh, G’d should remove the plague. Subsequent to this, he, Pharaoh, would release the Israelites from bondage and permit them to leave the country (temporarily). He stipulated only that the Israelites would not travel far (three days’ journey as per Moses’ original request) in order to perform their ritual in the desert.

התל is the same as להתל (i. e. the infinitive may be used with or without ל prefixed).

והעתרתי, a similar construction to vehacharamti in Numbers 21,2 והחרמתי את עריהם, “I will destroy their cities.” Another similar construction occurs in Ezekiel 26,3 והעליתי, and in Jeremiah 17,2 we find והעבדתיך, in all these examples the letters אהחע determine which vowels are used in this type of future tense, introduced by the inverted letter vav, if it is in the future tense or in the past tense. If it were in the ordinary past tense however, it should have read: he-evarti, he-eliticha, instead of ha-avarti and ha-aliticha. [the author quotes a few more examples which we can dispense with. Ed.]

AND MOSES SAID: BEHOLD, I GO OUT FROM THEE, AND I WILL ENTREAT THE ETERNAL THAT THE SWARMS WILL DEPART FROM PHARAOH, FROM HIS SERVANTS, AND FROM HIS PEOPLE, TOMORROW.¹⁹³The question here arises: Why did Moses say that he will pray that the removal of the plague be tomorrow, when Pharaoh had just said to him, Entreat for me (Verse 24)? Ramban proceeds to answer this question. Just as Pharaoh, during the plague of the frogs, had asked that it be removed tomorrow,¹⁹⁴Above, Verse 6. so did Moses want to do it in this case as well; he would pray that the swarms [of beasts] shall depart tomorrow. And then G-d removed the swarms,¹⁹⁵Verse 27. and they vanished completely, unlike the case of the frogs, [where Scripture states that they died].¹⁹⁶Above, Verse 9. This was for the reason, as stated by our Rabbis,¹⁹⁷Shemoth Rabbah 10:6. that the Holy One, blessed be He, desired to afflict them with plagues from which they would derive no benefit.¹⁹⁸If the beasts had died in the land of Egypt, the Egyptians would have made use of their skins. Hence they just disappeared. This of course was not the case with the frogs. Now Moses guarded himself when he spoke to Pharaoh, saying to destroy the frogs,¹⁹⁹Above, Verse 5. which alludes merely to their death, as I have explained there,¹⁹⁹Above, Verse 5. [while here in the case of swarms, he said that the swarms will depart].

וסר הערוב מפרעה, מעבדיו, ומעמו, מחר, “the wild beasts will retreat from Pharaoh, his servants and his people tomorrow.” Seeing that during the plague of the frogs Pharaoh had requested that the removal of the frogs be arranged for the following day, Moses told him that this time too he would pray for the wild beasts to depart on the following day. However, they would not die, as had the frogs, as our sages explained; this was because their carcasses would have proved useful and welcome to the Egyptians, and they were not to benefit from the plague. According to the plain meaning of the text the difference in the disappearance of the frogs on the one hand and the wild beasts on the other, is rooted in the fact that the frogs and similar low life creatures which are always spawned in multiple births, have a tendency to increase in huge numbers constantly. To bring them all back to the river would overtax the river’s ability to sustain them. The wild beasts did not increase in numbers during the time they invaded the urban areas of the country, and making them return to their normal habitat did not strain that habitat’s ability to sustain them. G’d had not created a single extra animal (mammal) in order for it to plague the Egyptians.

וסר הערוב מפרעה, “and the wild beasts will depart from Pharaoh, from his servants, and from his people to-morrow.” Moses told Pharaoh this in order that he should not assume that the plague was bound to stop on that day and that Moses knew this based on his astrological calculations. Just as with the plague of frogs Pharaoh had asked that it not be stopped until the following day as he had hoped to embarrass Moses, Moses now turned the tables on him using the delay in arranging relief to prove the same point. Both arrival and cessation of the plagues were announced on the day following their being announced.

V. 25. התל von תלל, verwandt mit דלל ,טלל Grundbedeutung: Niederstürzen aus der Höhe. דַל: nicht der ursprünglich Arme, sondern der Herabgekommene. טַל: der Niederschlag, der Dunst, der in Begriff ist, in die Höhe zu steigen, und niederschlägt, Tau. תֵל: etwas früher Hochgewesenes, das jetzt in Trümmern liegt. הָתֵל: erst etwas groß aufbauen und es dann wieder fallen machen. Analog mit במֵה, von רמה, schleudern, jemanden, der sich uns erst vertrauensvoll in die Hand gelegt, plötzlich wegschleudern, sein Vertrauen zu seinem Sturze missbrauchen. So הָתל, jemanden mit großen Versprechungen necken täuschen: "Du bauest eine große Hoffnung auf, mögest du dein Versprechen nicht in Trümmer werfen".

ויעתר אל ה׳ AND ENTREATED THE LORD (the verb is the Kal) — he concentrated his energies on prayer. So, too, if it had wished to use the term וַיַעְתִּיר (the Hiphil) it could have used it, and that would have signified, “and he increased words in prayer”. But when it uses an expression denoting “and he did something” (the Kal) it signifies “he prayed much (devoutly)”.

ויעתר, in order for G’d to remove the wild beasts at the time which Pharaoh had requested and in the manner he had asked for. We know that this time Pharaoh did not want to have to contend with the stench of the dead animals as he had had to when the crocodiles died on his territory, but that G’d made all these beasts retreat to where they had been before they had invaded the urban areas of Egypt. (compare verse 27)

ויסר הערב AND HE REMOVED THE SWARM OF ANIMALS — He merely removed them and they did not die as the frogs had died; for had they died, they (the Egyptians) could have made some use of their skins (Exodus Rabbah 11:3).

He caused the wild animals to depart. The wild animals and the locusts left Egypt after the plague, but the frogs died in Egypt, because Hashem wanted to teach the Jews that someone who is willing to give up his life for a sanctification of Hashem’s Name will be rescued. Therefore, all the frogs died except for those who jumped into the hot ovens. Later in history, Chananyah, Mishael, and Azariah derived that they should be willing to give up their lives for a sanctification of Hashem’s Name from the fact that only these frogs were saved from death.

ויסר הערוב “the wild beasts departed.” The Torah pointedly did not mention that these animals died as it had done with the frogs. In this instance G’d’s intention in bringing on this plague had been to make the lives of the Egyptians miserable; they were not to derive any benefit from these animals. The frogs were killed by G’d in order to produce the stench which discomfited the people. Had the wild beasts been allowed to die the Egyptians would have used their carcasses as food. G’d did not want this to happen.

They did not die as did the frogs. . . You might ask: Why did Rashi not explain this before, where it said (v. 25), “And the wild animals will depart from Pharaoh”? The answer is: It was Moshe’s way to use the term “depart” when praying [to end a plague]. For we see earlier that Moshe prayed (v. 7): “The frogs will be removed. . .” yet it is written [that in fact,] “The frogs died.” [Note: it seems that the order of Rashi’s commentary on these verses was different than what we have, thus prompting the following comment.] Since ויסר (to depart) explains וסר , which is written above (v. 25) and appears before ויעתר (v. 26), therefore Rashi explains ויסר (v. 27) before ויעתר , even though it is written afterwards. (Re’m)

Again this time. [Once more,] though he said, “I will send you out,” he did not keep his promise.

גם בפעם הזאת, just as G’d had stiffened Pharaoh’s heart after the relief experienced when the frogs had died, so that he had reneged on his promise.

גם בפעם הזאת, as he had done after the plague of the crocodiles had been removed. Seeing that the wild beasts had only retreated to their lairs and had not died, so that they still represented a potential threat, Pharaoh toughened his resolve and refused to send off the people.

גם בפעם הזאת, “also on this occasion.” During the first three plagues, which were summarized by Rabbi Yehudah as דצ'ך, the sorcerers appeared before Pharaoh each time. Their presence had exerted a psychological pressure on Pharaoh to remain steadfast in his refusal. This time he remained obstinate without the presence of his sorcerers exerting such pressure on him. They had already concluded that they were up against a higher power when they could not reproduce the lice. Seeing that on this occasion Pharaoh was politically isolated, the Torah wrote the words “also on this occasion,” in order to draw our attention to the fact that this occasion was different from previous ones.

ויכבד פרעה את לבו גם בפעם הזאת, “and Pharaoh hardened his heart again on this occasion.” The word גם, “also,” is justified, as Pharaoh had done the same during the plague of the frogs. (verse 11).