Commentaire sur L’Exode 17:18

AND ALL THE CONGREGATION OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL JOURNEYED FROM THE WILDERNESS OF SIN, BY THEIR STAGES, ACCORDING TO THE COMMANDMENT OF THE ETERNAL, AND THEY ENCAMPED IN REPHIDIM. Scripture is stating that they journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, where they were encamped after they had set out from Elim,⁴⁰⁴Above, 16:1. and covered various stages of their journey in accord with G-d’s command. Afterwards, they encamped in Rephidim. Scripture thus relates briefly here that when they first journeyed from the wilderness of Sin, they pitched in Dophkah, and afterwards in Alush, and from Alush they came to Rephidim.⁴⁰⁵Numbers 33:12-14. This is the meaning of the expression here, by their stages, since there were many stages by which they came from the wilderness of Sin to Rephidim, and they did not reach it on the first journey. Scripture, however, [omits all these various stages here] because its only concern is to explain their murmuring. At the beginning of their arrival in that wilderness [of Sin], they complained for bread, and now they quarreled [with Moses] over water, [as it is said], and there was no water for the people to drink. When they came to that place and did not find fountains of water, they at once quarreled with Moses. This is the meaning of the expression, Wherefore the people did quarrel with Moses,⁴⁰⁶Verse 2. for the murmurings mentioned in places where Scripture says, and they murmured,⁴⁰⁷Such as above, 16:2. mean complaints, i.e., that they were declaring their grievances about their condition, saying, “What shall we do? What shall we eat, and what shall we drink?” But vayarev (and he quarreled) means that they did actually make quarrel with Moses, coming to him and saying, “Give us water, you and Aaron your brother, for you are responsible, our blood is upon you.” And Moses said to them, “Why quarrel ye with me? Wherefore do ye try the Eternal?⁴⁰⁶Verse 2. This quarrel is to test G-d, that is whether He can give you water.⁴⁰⁸See Psalms 78:30. If you will hold your peace and let me alone and instead pray to Him, perhaps He will answer you.” And indeed, it was their intent to try [G-d], as Scripture says, And the name of the place was called Massah (Trying) and Meribah (Quarrel), because of the quarrel of the children of Israel and because they tried the Eternal, saying: Is the Eternal among us, or not?⁴⁰⁹Further, Verse 7. Then their anger against him relented,⁴¹⁰See Judges 8:3. and for a day or two, they were supplied by the waters in their vessels. But afterwards, the people thirsted there for water, and the people murmured against Moses,⁴¹¹Verse 3. something like the complaints they made whenever they wanted something, saying, Wherefore hast thou brought us up out of Egypt?⁴¹¹Verse 3. When Moses saw that they thirsted for water, he prayed to G-d and recounted before Him his distress when they first quarreled with him.⁴¹²Verse 4.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that there were two groups: one that quarreled [with Moses because they had no water to drink], and one [that had water which they brought from Alush, the place where they were encamped before coming to Rephidim,⁴¹³Numbers 33:14. but] who tested G-d [to see if He would give them water]. The correct interpretation is as I have explained.

לשתות העם, that the people could drink. The unusual construction is similar to Genesis 16,3 לשבת אברהם.

ויחנו ברפידים ואין מים, they camped at Refidim and there was no water, etc. According to Bechorot 5 the name "Refidim" is an allusion to רפיון ידים מן התורה, a slackening of adherence to Torah which itself is compared to water. Inasmuch as the Israelites neglected the study of Torah, G'd neglected to provide them with water.

ויסעו כל עדת בני ישראל...למסעיהם, “The entire community of the Children of Israel journeyed …on their respective journeys.” The Torah sums up in a few words that Israel made many separate journeys in the desert of Sin culminating in their arrival at Refidim, and this is why the text refers to the word למסעיהם, “according to their journeys.” En route, the people had encamped successively at Dofkah and Alush before reaching Refidim. The purpose of these verses is primarily to serve as background of what happened at Refidim. The journeys through this desert were earmarked by quarrels about lack of bread and subsequently, about lack of water.

(Exodus 17:1) "And the entire congregation of the children of Israel journeyed from the desert of Sin … and they encamped in Refidim": (homiletically,) "rafu yadam" ("their hands weakened") in words of Torah. And because Israel grew lax in Torah, Amalek attacked them (viz. 17:8), for the foe comes only as the result of sin and transgression.

Kap. 17. V. 1. Es heißt nicht: ואין מים לשתות, sondern: ואין מים לשתות העם, es fehlte ihnen noch nicht Wasser, sie sahen sich aber die Gegend an und fanden, dass dort für eine solche Menschenmenge nicht hinreichend Wasser sei und es ihnen daher an Wasser fehlen werde.

ממדבר סין למסעיהם, from the desert of Sin on their journeys; the Torah used an abbreviation here. The truth, as described in Numbers 33,1214, is that the way stations after the desert of Sin were: Dofkah, Alush, and Refidim, at which point they found themselves short of water. The reason why two waystations are omitted here is because of the disgrace of Israel who had wished to return to Egypt by the shortest possible route.

מה תנסון TO WHY DO YE TRY [THE LORD] by saying, “Will He be able to give us water in an arid land?”

מה תריבון עמדי?; do you not know that I do not act arbitrarily but only carry out G’d’s orders?

ויוב העם עם משה, The people quarrelled with Moses, etc. The quarrel consisted of the people demanding that Moses supply them with water; seeing that it was clear that Moses was not in a position to supply them with water, the request was only the preamble to a quarrel. If the people had really wanted to ask Moses for water they would have asked him to cry out to G'd just as their successors did forty years later in Numbers 21,7 when G'd had sent poisonous snakes against them. In this instance they did not even ask Moses to pray after he had told them not to try G'd by quarrelling with him. Alternatively, they demanded water much as a creditor demands repayment of a debt from his friend. It is somewhat strange that they used the plural תנו when demanding that Moses give them water; after all they spoke only to Moses. We may therefore assume that they included G'd in their demand. This would also explain why Moses accused them of including G'd as someone whom they "tried." When Moses mentioned G'd last, i.e."why do you quarrel with me and with G'd?," he meant that they knew very well that G'd was able to supply anything He wanted; their sin was in doubting whether G'd was in their midst.

וירב העם, “the people quarreled.” Ibn Ezra points out that the Torah writes “the people,” as opposed to “all the people” in contrast to the previous occasion when they did not have any more food. (16,2) At that time there were two groups of people, one which did not have any more water to drink, and one which had taken along water from Alush The group that had no drinking water quarreled with Moses, whereas the second group, although they did have water in their vessels, wanted to test G’d to see if He could and would supply water for the people. This is why the Torah, instead of using the familiar term וילונו, “they complained,” (with a measure of justification) now uses the term וירב, “they quarreled,” i.e. without justification. Moses therefore answered them by saying: “why do you pick a quarrel with me, and why do you put the Lord to a test?”

V. 2. וירב ist nicht תלונה, wie V. 3 וילך, das, wie wir aus der Bedeutung des לון gefunden, das Abhilfe suchen gegen ein fühlbar werdendes Ungemach bedeutet, sondern ist zunächst das Geltendmachen einer vermeintlichen oder wirklichen Rechtsforderung, wie bei dem Streit um die Brunnen, Bereschit 26, 20. Sie machen daher hier noch keine Vorwürfe, weisen nicht auf das Bedürfnis hin, sondern fordern als einen berechtigten Anspruch Wasser. Zu einem Lagerplatz gehört Wasser: תנו לנו וגו׳. — Wenn das ן in תריבון und תנסון die Person hervorhebt, so liegt die Entgegnung wohl darin: ihr wisst doch, dass ich euch nicht hierher geführt, sondern Gott, und ihr habt doch genug von Gott bereits erfahren, um ruhig zu vertrauen, Gott werde euch auch hier nicht verdursten lassen. Unter gewöhnlichen Umständen wäre eure Forderung eine gerechte.

תנו לנו מים, “give us water!” although Aaron had not been mentioned in this paragraph at all, the people used the plural mode when addressing Moses, although there had been no need to mention him at all.

'מה תנסון את ה?; if you really quarrel with me, this is equivalent to your quarrelling and testing the One whose agent I am. You are only endangering your own lives if you quarrel with G’d! If He becomes angry He will consider that He has to destroy you, seeing that He had demonstrated His power to you in deeds. We find Moses repeating this thought in Psalms 95,9 אשר נסוני אבותיכם בחנוני גן ראו פעלי, “when your fathers put Me to the test, tried Me, though they had seen My deeds.” [when someone who had never had a manifestation of G’d’s power “tests” Him, this is far less serious than when the Jewish people who had ample proof of G’d’s power would do the same. Ed]

מה תריבון מה תנסון, “Why do you quarrel? Why do you try the Lord?” Both of these words are spelled without the letter ו. [not in our versions of the Torah scrolls or the printed versions. Minchas shay quotes our author as the source of the above, without commenting. Ed.]

TO PUT US AND OUR CHILDREN AND OUR CATTLE TO DEATH WITH THIRST. In their complaint, they mentioned the cattle too, thus telling Moses that they need a lot of water and it is therefore necessary to take counsel on the whole matter. This is why it says at the second time [when the incident at the waters of Meribah is recorded], and water came forth abundantly, and the congregation drank, and their cattle.⁴¹⁴Ibid., 20:11. Now here it is not mentioned but it is self-understood that when the rock was turned into a pool of water, they drank and they watered their flocks (Ramban in Verse 5 further). In the instance of the waters of Meribah at Kadesh, it is mentioned on account of the mishap that resulted from the entire affair, as explained there; see also Ramban here in Verse 5 for another interpretation. And our Rabbis have said:⁴¹⁵Mechilta on the verse here. “They made their cattle equal in importance to themselves. They said: ‘A man’s beast is as his life. If a man travels on the road and his beast is not with him, he suffers.’”
Now the reason they mentioned us and our children and did not say generally: “to put us to death with thirst” or “to put to death this whole assembly,” [an expression] which would have included men, women and the little ones, as they said in other places,⁴¹⁶Such as above, 16:3, to put to death this whole assembly by famine. is that by mentioning the children to him, they emphasized their murmuring against him so that he should make haste in the matter, since the young ones could not suffer thirst at all and they would thus die before the eyes of their parents. This is something like the expression, The tongue of the sucking child cleaveth to the roof of his mouth for thirst.⁴¹⁷Lamentations 4:4.

ויצמא שם העם למים, The people thirsted there for water, etc. One cannot help wondering why G'd subjected the people to such a trial that they came close to dying of thirst. Most ordinary people would turn heretics if subjected to this kind of trial. Besides, it is even harder to understand Moses who did not take the initiative and offer prayers on behalf of the people and their suffering instead of crying out to G'd that the people were about to stone him in their frustration? Moses' prayer sounds as if he was insensitive to the people's thirst, concerned only with his own death by stoning!

ויצמא שם העם למים, “The people thirsted for water there.” When their thirst became intolerable, the people ganged up on Moses, wanting to know why, seeing that things were worse for them than in Egypt, he had bothered to take them out of there? Nachmanides describes what happened somewhat differently. As soon as the people arrived at Refidim and found that there were no wells of drinking water there, they immediately started a quarrel with Moses, and this is the reason why the Torah reports that the people quarreled with Moses without giving any specific reason. Their demand for water is self-explanatory. This time, as opposed to previous occasions, they demanded water from him, claiming that it was his responsibility to provide this for them. Moses answered them that they had addressed their complaint to the wrong party, seeing that it had not been he who had led them out of Egypt, but that they were in fact putting G’d to the test, seeing that it was He Who had taken them out of Egypt. He suggested that if they would stop pestering him and instead would pray to the Lord, their needs would soon be taken care of. We know that Moses was correct in accusing them of putting G’d’s ability to provide water for them to the test, as it is written in verse 7 ועל נסותם את ה' לאמור היש ה' בקרבנו אם אין, “because of the people putting G’d to the test, wanting to know if the Lord is among us or not.” When Moses realized how thirsty the people were, he himself brought their prayer to G’d, and he told G’d how the people had quarreled with him and had accused him of being responsible for their sorry condition.

אותי ואת בני, “me and my children.” On this occasion the people did not speak in general terms as previously, saying להמיתנו, “to cause our deaths,” or “to kill the whole community,” but they added their children as additional victims, all in order to make their complaint appear more urgent. When children have to die in the presence of their parents this is a more tragic situation.

It appears that G'd's purpose in subjecting the people to this test was to train them to raise their eyes heavenwards, to pray and to implore G'd in times of need because this is an important principle in matters of faith and attempts to perfect one's personality. You will note that G'd applied this same psychology when He allocated manna to the Israelites on a daily basis instead of giving them a weekly or monthly supply at a time. He also denied them this miraculous bread until they had pleaded with Him for sustenance. As soon as the people pleaded with G'd, He responded positively. In our paragraph we find that the Israelites contented themselves with complaining to Moses; They did not consider that their fate was subject to G'd's personal providence. As a result their situation grew steadily worse so that the Torah describes their thirst as overpowering. The Torah mentions that G'd tested them because they had not seen fit to request help from Him. When they asked if G'd were indeed in their midst or not, they demonstrated that they were not prepared to acknowledge that G'd guided their affairs by special providence. The only way G'd could prove that He was indeed in their midst was to allow the situation to become so critical that the people would learn to turn to Him as a result of the intensity of their thirst. Moses realised all this; this is why he refrained from praying to G'd sooner. When he saw that the situation had become intolerable, he asked G'd: "what shall I do for this people?" He meant "how can I deflect the people's complaint from me personally and have the people turn to You?" Clearly, Moses realised that the solution to the problem did not depend merely on prayer otherwise he would have prayed just as he had done when he faced the Sea of Reeds. He argued further that עוד מעט, if G'd were to allow the situation to deteriorate still further, the natural result of the people's frustration would be that they would stone him. It could well be that eventually and in desperation, the people would finally turn to G'd in prayer but by that time they would have killed him as a leader who had failed them.

את בני ואת מקני, “my children and my herds.” The reason why they mentioned the herds, separately, was to remind Moses that a great deal of water was needed, seeing that the animals consumed a lot of water. This is why the Torah makes a point that after Moses struck the rock lots of water gushed forth, enough for both the people and their herds. (Numbers 20,11)

It was this latter argument which G'd accepted; I have been troubled by the thought that a people who had witnessed so many miracles in Egypt, at the sea, and in the desert did not turn in prayer to the G'd who had performed all these miracles. After all, these people were aware of the efficacy of prayer having seen how G'd sent them their redeemer immediately after they had appealed to G'd in Exodus 2,23. G'd had told Moses specifically that He sent him in response to the people's groaning. Perhaps the people thought that as long as G'd was in their midst there was no need for prayer. What would have been the point of G'd bringing them into the desert if He did not intend to supply their needs? If G'd did not intend to supply their needs they would be lost anyways, so what good would prayer do? They concluded therefore that the only reason they had no water was because G'd was not in their midst.

עוד מעט YET A LITTLE means, if I wait but a little more they will stone me.

עוד מעט וסקלוני, “if this continues a little longer they are liable to stone me.” Moses did not mean this literally. What he meant was that the people were so embittered that if they had been able to, they would have stoned him.

If I wait etc. . . Rashi adds, “If I wait,” because otherwise it implies they will surely stone him before long — whether or not he waits [to give them water].

(Exodus 17:4) "and Moses cried out to the L rd": We are hereby apprised of the eminence of Moses. He did not say: Since they are quarreling with me I will not implore mercy for them, but "And Moses cried out to the L rd." "saying: What can I do to this people?" Moses said before the Holy One Blessed be He: L rd of the universe, between You and them I will be killed! And You tell me not to be harsh with them, viz. (Numbers 11:12) "For You say to me: "Bear them in your bosom as a nurse bears a nursling, etc." — when they want to kill me! Here the L rd "lowers" (Himself) and Moses "raises" himself (in protest). And elsewhere the L rd "raises" (Himself) and Moses "lowers" himself, viz. (Exodus 32:10) "And now leave Me and I will annihilate them, etc.", followed by (Ibid. 11) "And Moses prayed before the L rd, etc."

עבר לפני העם PASS BEFORE THE PEOPLE and see whether they will stone you! (Midrash Tanchuma, Beshalach 23) Why have you uttered a slander against My children?

AND THE ETERNAL SAID UNTO MOSES: PASS ON BEFORE THE PEOPLE. This is similar in usage to the following expressions: he [Joseph] caused them to pass into cities;⁴¹⁸Genesis 47:21. and I will make thee to pass with thine enemies into a land which thou knowest not.⁴¹⁹Jeremiah 15:14. Thus the meaning thereof here is: “go away from them to another place,” [as will be explained further]. Perhaps this is similar to the expressions: and he [Ahimaaz] overran the Cushite;⁴²⁰II Samuel 18:23. and he [Jacob] himself passed over before them,⁴²¹Genesis 33:3. meaning that he [Jacob] went in the forefront of them.
The purport of this verse is that the people were in Rephidim, and the rock from which the waters were to come was in Horeb,⁴²²Verse 6: Behold, I will stand before thee there upon the rock in Horeb. this being Mount Sinai, according to the opinion of the former ones,⁴²³I.e., the Rabbis of the Talmud. See Shabbath 89 a: “Mount Sinai bears five names: the wilderness of Zin, Horeb, etc.” or in my opinion, some city near the mountain, as I will yet explain.⁴²⁴At the beginning of Seder Yithro (18:1). Moses therefore had to go first before the people, to pass on from Rephidim to Horeb — a distance of one more parsah [a Persian mile] or more — from the camp before them. It was for this reason that G-d said to him, Pass on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of Israel… and go. That is to say, “Go until you will see Me stand before you upon the rock in Horeb.” Now Moses hit the rock, and water came out of it. Scripture however does not relate that the congregation and their cattle drank, as it does in the second incident [at the waters of Meribah],⁴²⁵Numbers 20:11. This took place in Kadesh. See also above, Note 414. for it is self-understood that they did so. It is clear that the people did not go to Horeb to drink, since they did not arrive in front of Mount Sinai until afterwards in the third month.⁴²⁶Further, 19:1. Instead, they sent their young men and their cattle there to draw water and bring it to them, as is customary in camps.
It appears likely to me that the waters — cold flowing waters⁴²⁷Jeremiah 18:14. — came out from the rock in Horeb and flowed to Rephidim, and there the people drank them. This is Scripture’s intent in saying, He brought streams out of the rock, and caused waters to run down like rivers,⁴²⁸Psalms 78:16. and it is further written, He opened the rock, and waters gushed out; they ran, a river in the dry places.⁴²⁹Ibid., 105:41. The verse stating, Behold, He smote the rock, that waters gushed out, and streams overflowed,⁴³⁰Ibid., 78:20. also applies to the rock in Horeb, in line with the plain meaning of Scripture.⁴³¹According to the Midrash, however, this verse (Psalms 78:20) was said with reference to Moses’ smiting the rock in Kadesh, or, as they are called, the waters of Meribah (Bamidbar Rabbah 19:8). The second rock in Kadesh,⁴³²Numbers 20:1. [instead of gushing forth water], became cleft with a sort of spring welling forth waters, and therefore Scripture states, That is ‘the well’ whereof the Eternal said unto Moses, etc.,⁴³³Ibid., 21:16. and Israel said in the Song, ‘The well,’ which the princes digged,⁴³⁴Ibid., Verse 18. for it was like a well that was dug. It is for this reason that Scripture says there, and the congregation drank, and their cattle,⁴³⁵Ibid., 20:11. which means that there they drank from it at that place immediately, but here [in Horeb], overflowing rivers came from it and they drank of it in their homes at their will. Now although according to the tradition of our Rabbis, it was all Miriam’s Well,⁴³⁶“That is to say, the rock which was in Rephidim (Horeb) is the same as the one in Kadesh, this being ‘Miriam’s Well,’ which accompanied the Israelites on all their marches during the forty years’ wandering” (Rabbeinu Bachya, Vol. II, p. 153 in my edition). The tradition is mentioned in Bamidbar Rabbah 20:2. This miracle was wrought for the merits of the prophetess Miriam. Ramban’s intent is thus clear: If it was all Miriam’s Well, how can you explain its different forms of activity, for in Horeb it was like a gushing stream, and in Kadesh it was like a well? it is possible that on the first occasion [in Horeb] and during all their forty years’ wandering, the waters came gushing out from the rock like overflowing rivers. The second time, [in Kadesh], as a punishment for that which took place there, it became [only] like a dug well that was full of fresh water [not a gushing spring].

עבור לפני העם, and their complaints will cease when they see that you are making an effort to provide their needs.

עבור לפני העם, "pass before the people, etc." Perhaps G'd was aware that the thirst amongst the people was very great and that they would be in danger of their lives very shortly. This is why He told Moses to pass in front of them on a path which suggested to them that he went to find water in order to quench the fire of their thirst. He was not to take a route unknown to the people and not visible to them. He was also to take along the elders to confirm the people's impression that Moses was going in search of water and not to isolate himself in prayer.

עבור לפני העם, “pass before the people, etc.” Nachmanides understands the word עבור here as an instruction to walk ahead of the people, as in Samuel II 18,23 ויעבור את הכושי, “he overtook the Kushi.” We have to remember that the people were encamped at Refidim, whereas the rock from which the water would gush forth was located at Mount Chorev, also known as Mount Sinai, or that Refidim was a small town near the bottom of that mountain. I will still have occasion to describe the topography in detail. At any rate, it was a distance of approx. 4 kilometers from the camp to where that rock was located, and Moses at the head of the elders would walk there in full view of the people. Moses would have the vision of an angel on top of that rock, indicating that he had arrived at the correct spot. In our verse here, as opposed to a similar phenomenon almost 40 years later, the Torah, though reporting that the rock produced water, did not mention that this water was adequate for the people’s herds. (verse 6) Nonetheless, it is quite clear that there must have been enough water, not only this, but the people did not have to trouble themselves to march to Mount Chorev in order to be able to drink that water. Otherwise, why would the Torah have to tell us in chapter 19 that the people reached the edge of that desert on the first day of the third month and apparently encamped near the foot of Mount Chorev on the third day of that month. It seems pretty clear that the waters from Mount Chorev flowed to Refidim and arrived there in pristine condition for the people and their herds to be able to drink from. The other rock, at Kadesh (Numbers 27,14) apparently produced a cleft in the rock, which resulted in the rock being like a natural spring, people streaming to it to drink from it directly, as from a fountain. It was this well which the people immortalized in their song in Numbers Here the waters flowed directly past the people’s huts or tents so as to make it most convenient for them. Even though both sources of water are part of the concept of בארה של מרים, “the well granted the people through the merit of Miriam,” it is likely that right up until the fortieth year they benefited from the water which originated at Mount Chorev, whereas in Numbers, the people’s conducted merited a certain measure of punitive action, so that the continued accessibility of their water was less convenient than previously. The expression באר חפרוה שרים, “a well which had been excavated by nobles,” may reflect that subtle distinction.

V. 5. u. 6. Von Refidim zum Choreb ist nur eine Station und scheint überhaupt nach diesen Versen wohl kaum eine Tagereise gewesen zu sein. Es scheint, ohne ihr vorzeitiges Murren, habe Gott sie erst den Mangel recht fühlen lassen und sie dann nach Choreb, dem eigentlichen Ziel ihrer Wanderung in die Wüste ziehen lassen, und habe ihnen dann dort aus dem Felsen Wasser strömen lassen wollen. Sollten sie ja dort das Gesetz erhalten und lange Zeit weilen. Sie waren ja schon einmal drei Tage ohne Wasser zu finden gewandert, ohne umzukommen. Sie hatten also gewiss einigen Wasservorrat mit auf der Wanderung. Es gewinnt dieses umsomehr Wahrscheinlichkeit, wenn wir bedenken, dass, nach den Überlieferungen, das Wasser von da an, als der sogenannte Mirjamsbrunnen, mit ihnen gewandert, sie daher fortan jeden letzenden Trunk in der Wüste dem Felsen am Gottesberge der Gesetzempfängnis zu verdanken hatten und haben sollten. Es erklärte sich dann auch der Bamidbar 21, 18 in dem Brunnengesange vorkommende Ausdruck umsomehr und eigentlicher: במחקק במשענתם, derselbe Griffel, der ihnen die Gesetze schrieb, grub ihnen den Brunnen, der sie in der Wüste am Leben erhielt. In der Tat finden wir auch von dieser Wasserversorgung am Horeb im ersten Jahre bis nach Mirjams Tode im vierzigsten nicht wieder, dass ihnen Wasser gefehlt. Ihr vorzeitiges Murren veranlasste es nur, dass sie Gott schon jetzt vom Horeb her in Refidim mit Wasser versorgte. Die Worte ויצאו ממנו מים ושתה העם scheinen nämlich zu bezeichnen, dass das Wasser vom Horeb nach Refidim zum Lager des Volkes geflossen. So wird auch dieser Vorgang Ps. 105, 41 besungen: "Es forderte und Er ließ den Selaw kommen und sättigte sie mit Himmelsbrot, öffnete einen Fels, und Wasser floss und ging durch Wüsten als ein Strom!" Demgemäß heißt das עבור לפני העם, gehe dem Volke voraus; gehe du dorthin, wohin das ganze Volk später hinkommen soll. ומטך, der Stab, mit dem du den Ägyptern das Wasser zum Trinken genommen, soll jetzt Israel Wasser zum Trinken schaffen.

וקח אתך מזקני ישראל, “and take with you some of the elders of Israel.” They were to be witnesses to the miracle that was to occur when, in response to Moses hitting the rock, a supply of water would materialise. The presence of these elders would prevent the people from claiming that the location (near Sinai) from which this water originated was one where fountains of water were located.

וקח אתך מזקני ישראל AND TAKE WITH THEE OF THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL as witnesses — that they may see that it is by your agency that the water will come forth from the rock and that people may not say that there had been springs there from time immemorial (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:5:2).

AND THY ROD, WHEREWITH THOU SMOTEST THE RIVER, TAKE IN THY HAND. This means “[the staff wherewith] you commanded Aaron [to strike the river].”⁴³⁷Above, 7:19. He mentioned the striking of the river, but He did not say, “and the rod which was turned to a serpent”⁴³⁸Ibid., Verse 15. or “the rod wherewith you did the signs.”⁴³⁹See above, 4:17. This was in order to call attention to the wonder in it, for at that time, the rod turned the waters into blood, thus removing from them their particular nature, and now the rod brought water into a flinty rock,⁴⁴⁰See Psalms 114:8. thus doing things of contrary effect.

ומטך אשר הכית בו את היאור, your staff with which you had smitten the river so that the Egyptians had given up looking for water to drink, will now perform the opposite function and provide you with drinking water.

ומטך אשר הכית בו את היאור, “and your staff, the one with which you smote the river Nile, etc.” Even though it had not been Moses personally who had smitten the river with his staff, but Aaron, (Exodus 7,19) seeing that Moses had instructed Aaron to do this, he is the one considered as having initiated it. The reason the staff is described in its relation to having converted water to blood, and nothing is said about any of the other miracles in which Moses’ staff had been featured, is that G’d wanted to show that this very staff which had been the source of harm, would now be playing the role of being an instrument that orchestrated something beneficial.

אשר הכית בו את היאור, "with which you have struck the river Nile." This in itself would be a remarkable miracle seeing that the very staff which had made the water of the Nile fetid, undrinkable, and turned it into blood, would now produce water for the Israelites to drink. This would also deflate the irreligious heretics who denied the fact that Moses' staff possessed miraculous powers.

אשר הכית בו את היאור, “with which you had struck the river Nile;” [and turned its water into blood. Ed.] Moses was to demonstrate that his staff was not only an instrument with which to produce harmful effects. Actually, it had not been Moses who had struck the Nile but Aaron. (Exodus 7,19) The fact is that whatever Aaron did in Egypt, he did as the disciple of his master, Moses. This time, instead of denying water through his staff, he produced water by means of it.

ומטך אשר הכית בו את היאר AND THY STAFF, WHEREWITH THOU SMOTEST THE RIVER — What is the force of the words “wherewith thou smotest the river” — they are apparently superfluous? But these are added because the Israelites had said of the staff that it was intended only for punishment: by it Pharaoh and the Egyptians had been stricken with many plagues in Egypt and at the Red Sea. On this account it is stated here: take the staff wherewith thou smotest the river — they shall see now that it is also intended for good (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:5:3).

והלכת. from the camp to the rock.

והכית בצור AND THOU SHALT SMITE THE ROCK — It does not say here “thou shalt smite על הצור”, upon the surface of the rock, but בצור, right into the rock — from this it follows that the rod must have been composed of a kind of hard material the name of which is sapphire, and the rock was split by it (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:6:2).

BEHOLD, I WILL STAND BEFORE THEE THERE UPON THE ROCK IN HOREB. Since the wonder with the water in this place was now to become a permanent feature as long as they would be in the wilderness, as our Rabbis have said,⁴⁴¹See above, Note 436. this was why the Divine Glory was revealed upon it at this place, just as it says concerning the manna, And in the morning, then ye shall see the Glory of the Eternal,⁴⁴²Above, 16:7. since it remained a continuous wonder.

והכית בצור ושתה העם, this will teach them that the staff is not an instrument which performs certain functions naturally, being unable to change its functions. It will show you that the staff is an instrument carrying out the will of its owner. This is why it can be used to perform opposing functions on different occasions.

הנני עומד לפניך, "I will be standing there before you, etc." The word לפניך refers to the place Moses was standing on when G'd spoke to him, whereas the word שם immediately afterwards refers to the rock. G'd emphasised that the whole earth is filled with His glory on a permanent basis and that He does not have to change location. However, there are sites where His presence is more manifest than in others. Alternatively, the degree in which G'd manifests Himself in certain locations is determined by the preparation that location has undergone in order to be a site fit for G'd to reveal Himself.

הנני עומד לפניך, “behold, I shall stand before you, etc.” seeing that the miracle which was about to occur was one that would be part of their daily experience for the length of time they would be in the desert, similar to the miracle of the manna, it was appropriate that just as the miracle of the descent of the manna was introduced with a visible manifestation of G’d’s glory, so this miracle too should be introduced by a similar visible manifestation of G’d’s glory.

הנני עומד לפניך שם על הצור בחורב, “here I shall stand in front of you there by the Chorev (mountain).” This rock at Refidim was the same rock which we encounter almost 40 years later at Kadesh. This was also the source of the well of Miriam which traveled with the Israelites through the desert during all those years (compare Bamidbar Rabbah 1,2). The very word הנני used by G’d prior to the rock erupting in a well was the same as that used by G’d prior to releasing the manna from heaven. Just as the manna became a daily feature for the remainder of their trek through the desert until Moses’ death, so the well which appeared here for the first time became the Israelites’ constant companion at least until the death of Miriam. Furthermore, just as the giving of the manna had been preceded by a revelation of G’d’s glory (16,7), so the miracle of the rock erupting as a well was also preceded by a revelation of the glory of G’d seeing it was an ongoing miracle just as was that of the manna (compare Nachmanides).

בחורב, והכית בצור, although the people were encamped at Refidim, Moses went all the way to Mount Sinai to produce water.

והכית בצור, “strike at the rock!” the Torah did not say that Moses was to strike “on the rock,” i.e. על הצור. This proves that the staff was made of an extremely hard material, sanpiryon. It would not be broken on impact with the rock.

היש ה' בקרבנו?, if He is going to give us water.

היש ה' בקרבנו אם אין, “if the Lord is in our midst or not?” Actually instead of the word אם אין, “if nothing,” we would have expected the expression אם לא, “if not?” This is the way the Torah expresses such alternatives in 16,4 for instance, where G’d had explained that the daily manna ration was designed to test whether the Israelites had faith in Him “or not.” The Torah was concerned to allude to the attribute אין, which is also known as יראה, an attribute second to which is the one called יש, or in more familiar terms חכמה (compare commentary on 16,24). This is the reason you find the name ה' immediately next to the word יש to show you how closely these two attributes are associated with one another. Yaakov had first realized this after his dream with the ladder when he awoke and said אכן יש ה' במקום הזה, (Genesis 28,16). This is the attribute Solomon had in mind when he said in Proverbs 8,21 להנחיל אוהבי יש “and to let those who love Me inherit יש.” You have learned already that the two emanations (attributes) חכמה and יראה cannot really be separated from one another. The teachers of the Mishnah have already alluded to this when they said (Avot 3,17) “where there is no יראה there can also not be any חכמה, and where there is no חכמה, there cannot be any יראה. The two attributes are inseparably intertwined with one another. Israel’s sin at Refidim was that they tried to separate חכמה and יראה. This is a sin of a heretical nature. This is why they were punished immediately by the attack of Amalek who represents heresy of the worst kind.

V. 7. ריב :על ריב וגו׳ ועל נסתס וגו׳ gegen Mosche, נסותס gegen Gott. Auch hieraus ergibt sich, dass das Bedürfnis nach Wasser noch gar nicht eine die augenblickliche Abhilfe erfordernde Höhe erreicht hatte. Zur Zeit hätte Gott sie nach Horeb geführt und dort ihnen das völlige Bedürfnis für die ganze künftige Wanderung geschaffen. In Refidim war es noch immer zweifelnder Kleinmut, der vor der Gefahr der Hilfe sicher sein will, dabei spricht das היש ד׳ בקרבנו וגו׳ nicht sowohl einen Zweifel an der Allmacht Gottes als vielmehr den Zweifel aus, ob er denn auch בקרבנו, mit seiner Wunderallmacht auch inmitten des Menschenkreises weile und allen seinen Nöten und Bedürfnissen nahe sei. Die allgemeine Vorstellung von Natur, Gott und Mensch war eine dieser in Israel und durch Israel zum Bewusstsein zu bringenden Wahrheit so entgegenstehende, es war die Natur ein so in unabänderliche Notwendigkeitsklammern gebanntes Ewiges, es gehörten die Gottheiten selbst so sehr zu dieser gebundenen unfreien Natur, und es stand der Mensch so sehr unter dem doppelten Bann der blinden Natur- und Göttermacht, es war daher der Schritt zu der Erkenntnis der Natur als in Freiheit geschaffenes und noch in ungehinderter Freiheit beherrschtes Werk eines freien, allmächtigen, einzigen Gottes, zu der Erkenntnis Gottes als einzigen, persönlichen, freien, allmächtigen Schöpfers, Ordners und unumschränkten Gebieters der Welt, vor allem aber zu der Erkenntnis des Menschen als von diesem freien persönlichen Weltschöpfer zur freien Persönlichkeit geschaffenen und in der sittlich freien Unterordnung unter den Willen dieses Einzigen durch diesen und von diesem freien Weltgebieter selbst über die blinde Gewalt der tief unter ihm stehenden Naturmächte zu hebenden, ersten Gottesdieners in der Welt — es war dieser Schritt ein so ungeheurer, der gegensätzliche Widerspruch der ganzen übrigen Welt ein so überwältigender, dass wir uns wahrlich nicht wundern dürfen, wenn dieses Grundbewusstsein alles jüdischen Denkens und Handelns erst nach und nach zur vollen Klarheit und Entschiedenheit sich in den Gemütern des ersten Gottesvolkes befestigte und alle die großen Erfahrungen der jetzt erst beginnenden jüdischen Geschichte dazu gehörten, um diese Wahrheit für immer zu unserm unverlierbaren Eigentum zu machen.

ויבא עמלק THEN CAME AMALEK — Scripture places this section immediately after this preceding verse (they said, “Is the Lord among us or not?”) to imply, “I am ever among you and ready at hand for every thing you may need, and yet you say, “Is the Lord among us or not?” By your lives, I swear that the hound (Amalek) shall come and bite you, and you will cry for Me and then you will know where I am!” A parable: it may be compared to a man who carried his son upon his shoulder, and went out on a journey. The son saw an article and said, “Father, pick up that thing and give it to me”. He gave it to him, and so a second time and so also a third time. They met a certain man to whom the son said, “Have you seen my father anywhere?” Whereupon his father said to him, “Don’t you know where I am?” — He, therefore, cast him off from himself and a hound came and bit him (Midrash Tanchuma, Yitro 3).

ויבא עמלק, at the sound of the people’s being frustrated with thirst. This is what Moses meant when he recalled the incident 40 years later in Deuteronomy 25,18 describing the Israelites’ state of mind at the time as ואתה עיף ויגע, “you were tired and worn out.” We find the expression עיף linked to water also in Job 22,7 לא מים עייף תשקה, “You do not give the thirsty water to drink.” (Eliphaz accusing Job) We also find the word applied to earth itself in Isaiah 32,2 בארץ עיפה, “in a languishing land.”

ויבא עמלק וילחם עם ישראל, Amalek came and fought with Israel, etc. G'd punished the people for having neglected Torah which is compared to both fire and water (compare Jeremiah 23,29: "Behold My word is like fire"). The fiery sword and the thirst for water were the punishment which fitted the crime.

Places this section adjacent. . . It is surprising that Rashi brings this Midrash, as he only brings Midrashim explaining adjacent sections when the sections are written out of sequence. But here they need to be adjacent because both incidents occurred in the same place. (Re”m) Gur Aryeh explains that Rashi [brings the Midrash because he] is answering the question: Why did it not say, “Amalek went out,” as in (Devarim 2:32), “Sichon went out to war against us”? Therefore Rashi explains: “The Torah places this section adjacent to the previous verse. . . that the dog (Amaleik) will come and bite you. . ..” [In other words, it says] “Amaleik came” because they asked, “Is Hashem among us or not?” [Another explanation:] I wrote many times that Rashi only explains why verses are adjacent when there are extra words. Therefore Rashi comments here about the juxtaposition. Rashi is answering the question: Is “In Rephidim” not superfluous? It is written in v. 17:1, “They camped in Rephidim.” And it is written in 19:2, “They journeyed from Rephidim.” Consequently, whatever happened in between occurred in Rephidim. Perforce, “In Rephidim” is written here to tell us that the incident occurred in Rephidim [i.e., the verse of, “They tested Hashem, saying, ‘Is Hashem among us or not?’”] caused that “Amaleik came.” And that is why Rashi says, “Adjacent to the previous verse,” rather than, “Adjacent to the previous section.” Rashi is explaining the juxtaposition [of “Amaleik came”] specifically regarding this verse. (Nachalas Yaakov)

VV. 8.—16. Alle Erfahrungen, die das zum Gottesvolke bestimmte Israel seit seinem Eintritte in die Wüste bisher gemacht, Mara, Wachteln, Manna, Schabbat, Wasser aus dem Felsen, lehrten es seine künftige Stellung zu der Natur kennen, lehrten es, welche Unabhängigkeit von den Naturgewalten es mit alleiniger Unterwerfung unter den Willen des Einzigen zu gewinnen haben solle. Eine Erfahrung war noch in diesen Vorbereitungswochen für die Gesetzempfängnis zu machen übrig: die Stellung des künftigen Gottesvolkes als Volk unter den Völkern, seine Stellung zu den Menschengewalten und für die Zukunft der Menschengewalt. Diese Erfahrung sollte ihnen noch in Refidim werden; ihr Lehrmittel war Amalek.

ויבוא עמלק, Amalek came;” it is difficult to understand why Amalek, if he was keen on attacking the Israelites, had waited until after they had been so miraculously saved from the Egyptians. He would have had a much easier target when the seventy people making up Yaakov’s family were on their way to Egypt. The answer may be that when G–d said to Avraham (Genesis 15,13) ועבדום וענו אותם, “they will serve them and they (their masters) will abuse them,” that as soon as Avraham would die this prophecy would be come applicable to Yitzchok and upon Yitzchok’s death it would devolve on Yaakov and his children. Amalek may have reasoned that if he were to wipe out Yaakov and family, this curse would devolve upon him. He therefore waited until the 400 years were up according to his calculation, before attacking the descendants of Avraham.

ויבא עמלק, “Amalek came;” where did Amalek come from? Our verse must be understood in terms of what we have been told in Genesis 36,6, where Esau and all his clans are reported as having moved away from the land of Canaan, after the reconciliation which included Esau’s ceding the claim to the land of Canaan to his brother Yaakov’s descendants. At that time Rashi explained that Esau, aware of the promise and curse G-d had made toAvraham at the covenant between the pieces in Genesis chapter 15, the promise of taking over the land of Canaan had been made conditional on Abraham’s descendants having been strangers and part of that time even slaves, for 400 years. Esau decided then to forego the promise in order to escape the curse of the 400 year wait. His descendants, one of whom was his grandson Amalek, realised that the 400 years had elapsed and that by now the only thing that was left was the promise. He therefore decided that as the older son of Yitzock’s descendant, to stake his claim by force. He was also aware that his grandfather had been motivated to leave the land of Canaan as he had looked like a great fool for having sold his birthright, which had given Yaakov, as the firstborn, a claim to the land of Canaan. He believed the time was ripe then, especially while the Israelites were in noman’s land, land that they had no claim to, would not enjoy preferential treatment by G-d in such an encounter.

Wie Esaws Genius einst Jakob, Israels Ahn, auf dem Wege zur eigenen Selbständigkeit in nächtlichem Angriff das ganze ringende Geschick und den endlichen, Gott verkündenden Sieg durchleben ließ, den Esaws Kinder Jakobs Söhnen während der Nachtjahrhunderte der Volksgeschichte bereiten würden: so war Esaws Enkel, Amalek, das erste und einzige Volk, das Jakobs Enkeln, Israel, auf ihrem Zuge zur nationalen Selbständigkeit, ungereizt und unbedroht, sich mit feindlichem Angriff entgegenwarf. Wie עיף ויגע, wie wanderungsmüde und schwach auch dieses mit Weib und Kindern eine Heimat suchende Familienvolk erschien, die Gottesmacht, die schirmend und leitend über ihnen schwebte, war so imposant sichtbar geworden, dass ihr Schrecken alle übrigen Völker, selbst die zunächst bedrohten, lähmte. Philistäa fürchtete, Edom blieb bestürzt, Moab zitterte, Kanaan war ganz verzagt, nur Amalek eilte, völlig unprovoziert, herbei, um das Ruhmeswagnis und den Kampf mit der Macht zu bestehen, der selbst ein Pharao erlegen. Es allein לא ירא אלקי׳, fürchtete Gott nicht. Es allein war der Erbe jenes Geistes, der sich das Schwert zum Anteil erkor, der den Ruhm in blutigem Lorbeer, und der das נעשה לנו שם, mit welchem der alte Nimrod die Weltgeschichte eröffnet, in Vernichtung des Volksglücks und Zerstörung des Menschenheils zu verwirklichen sucht. Diese Ruhm suchende Gewalt ist der erste und letzte Feind des Menschenheils und des Gottesreiches auf Erden. Pharaonische, Interessen suchende Gewalt hat noch Interesse an der Erhaltung der Geknechteten und kann selbst ein Freund der Freiheit werden, wenn die Freiheit in ihrem Interesse wuchert. Amaleks Ruhm suchendes Schwert hat keine Ruhe, so lange noch ein Puls in ihm nicht huldigender Freiheit schlägt, so lange noch ein bescheidenes Glück blüht, das vor seiner Gewalt nicht zittert. — Ebenbürtige, gleich ihm schwertgerüstete Gewalt hasst Amalek nicht, sieht vielmehr in solcher Rüstung nur achtende Furcht vor seinem Schwerte, bekriegt, aber achtet, was ihn anerkennt und dem gleichen Prinzipe huldigt. Da aber sieht er einen Gegenstand tödlichen Hasses und gründlicher Verachtung, wo man es wagt, das Schwert entbehrlich zu finden, wo man geistig-sittlichen Mächten zu vertrauen wagt, von denen das Schwert ebensowenig eine Ahnung hat, als es sie zu erreichen vermag. In dem Vertreter der friedlichen Hoheit des Menschen sieht es den Hohn seines Prinzips, sieht es seinen einzigen Gegner und ahnt es seinen einstigen Sturz. Mit dem sichern Instinkt des Hasses eilt daher Nimrod-Amalek herbei, den Herold dieser geistig sittlichen Friedenshoheit des Menschen gleich bei seinem ersten Auftreten in der Völkergeschichte zu zertreten. Amalek kam und bekriegte Israel in Refidim. Vielleicht, wenn nicht Israels Gott versuchender Kleinmut Refidims Umwandlung zu einer Wasser bietenden Lagerstätte veranlasst hätte, wäre Israel schon längst nach Horeb weiter geführt worden und Amalek hätte es nicht mehr in Refidim getroffen. So aber hatte Israel diese neue angstvolle Erfahrung zu bestehen.

בחר לנו CHOOSE OUT MEN FOR US — for me and for you: he (Moses) placed him (Joshua) on the same level with himself. They (the Rabbis) derived from here the teaching: let thy disciple’s honour be as dear to thee as thy own. And whence may we derive the next statement in thee well-known passage: and thy colleague’s honour as dear to thee as the reverence due to thy teacher? Because it is said, (Numbers 12:11) “And Aaron spake to Moses, “I beseech thee, my lord” — but surely Aaron was older than his brother and yet by addressing him as “my lord” he treated his colleague (Moses) as his teacher! “And the reverence due to thy teacher as the reverence due to God” — whence may this be derived? Because it is said, (Numbers 11:28) “[And he (Joshua) said (to his teacher, Moses)] “My lord, Moses, כלאם”, destroy them (כַּלֵּם) from out of the world! they who rebel against thee deserve to be destroyed just the same as though they had rebelled against the Holy One, blessed be He (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:9:1).

AND MOSES SAID TO JOSHUA. It would appear from here that from the day he came before him, Moses called him Joshua, and so it is also written: And Joshua heard the noise of the people.⁴⁴³Further, 32:17. Scripture which states in the case of the spies, And Moses called Hoshea the son of Nun, Joshua,⁴⁴⁴Numbers 13:16. must then be referring to the beginning, [when Joshua first came to minister before him]. The verse informs us that this Hoshea the son of Nun, who was chosen to be among the spies, is the same one that Moses called Joshua. Our Rabbis commented⁴⁴⁵Sotah 34 b, and quoted by Rashi, ibid. [that Moses gave him this name of Yehoshua, which is a compound of Y-ah (G-d) and hoshea (help), because] he in effect prayed for him, “May G-d help thee that thou mayest not follow the [evil] counsel of the spies.” The intent of this comment is to state that because of this event of which Moses knew in advance, i.e., that Joshua was destined to go with the spies, he called him by that name [Yehoshua — Joshua] at the outset. We may also say that at that time [when the spies were chosen], Moses designated that name in front of the assembly, i.e., that his name henceforth be not Hoshea but Joshua.
The reason that Moses commanded Joshua to fight with Amalek was so that he [Moses] might pray with the raising of hands on the top of the hill.⁴⁴⁶Verse 10. He went up there so that he might see the Israelites engage in battle and train his sight on them to bring them blessing. They too, upon seeing him with his hands spread heavenward and saying many prayers, would have trust in him, and they would thus be endowed with additional valor and strength.
In Pirke d’Rabbi Eliezer,⁴⁴⁷In the middle of Chapter 44. we find additionally: “All Israel went outside of their tents, and they saw Moses kneeling on his knees, and they did likewise. He fell on his face to the earth and they did likewise. He spread his hands heavenward, and they also did so. [From here, you learn the principle that] as the public reader of prayers⁴⁴⁸Literally: “the deputy of the congregation.” recites, so do all the people respond after him.⁴⁴⁹See Berachoth 49 b: “After the fashion of his benediction, so do the others answer him.” See my Hebrew commentary, p. 371, for further elucidation of this point. And thus the Holy One, blessed be He, caused Amalek and his people to fall by the hand of Joshua.” But if so, [i.e., if Moses’ hands were spread heavenward], the sense of the expression, with the rod of G-d in my hand, must be that when Moses went up to the top of the hill and saw Amalek, he stretched forth his hand with the rod to bring down [upon the Amalekites] strokes of pestilence, the sword and destruction,⁴⁵⁰See Esther 9:5. just as it is said in the case of Joshua: Stretch out the javelin that is in thy hand toward Ai, for I will give it into thy hand.⁴⁵¹Joshua 8:18. From the moment Moses began to pray and his hands were spread heavenward, he held nothing in his hand.
Moses our teacher did all this because Amalek was an enduring nation⁴⁵²See Jeremiah 5:15. and very powerful. The Israelites, on the other hand, were not accustomed to battle and had never seen it, just as Scripture says, lest peradventure the people repent when they see war.⁴⁵³Above, 13:17. In addition they were faint and weary, as it is written in the Book of Deuteronomy.⁴⁵⁴Deuteronomy 25:18. Therefore, he [Moses] feared them, and it became necessary for all this prayer and supplication.
It is possible that Moses feared lest Amalek be victorious with the sword, for he was the nation that inherited the sword by virtue of the blessing of the patriarch [Isaac], who said [to Esau, Amalek’s ancestor], and on thy sword you shall live.⁴⁵⁵Genesis 27:40. The first and final wars against Israel stem from this family, as Amalek is of the descendants of Esau.⁴⁵⁶Ibid., 36:12. It is from him who stood at the head of the nations [in power]⁴⁵⁷Numbers 24:20. Amalek was the first of the nations. See Ramban, ibid., where he interprets it to mean: “Amalek is the ‘mightiest’ of the nations. This was why he dared to come to fight Israel,” it is clear that Ramban’s intent here is similar. that the [first] war came against us. From Esau’s descendants, [namely, Rome],⁴⁵⁸See Vol. I, pp. 445, 568-569. the [present] exile and the last⁴⁵⁹Ramban pointedly uses the word “last” and not “the second” in order to indicate that the Third Sanctuary, for the restitution of which we pray, will never suffer destruction. The second destruction by the hands of the Romans was thus the “last” destruction. destruction of the Sanctuary came upon us, just as our Rabbis have said⁴⁶⁰Gittin 57b. See also above, Note 458. that today we are in the exile of Edom. When he will be vanquished, and he together with the many nations that are with him will be discomfited, we shall be saved out of it [i.e., the exile] forever, just as [the prophet] said, And saviors shall come up on Mount Zion, to judge the mount of Esau; and the kingdom shall be the Eternal’s.⁴⁶¹Obadiah 1:21. Now whatever Moses and Joshua did with them [the Amalekites] at first, Elijah and Mashiach ben Yoseph⁴⁶²Succah 52b. See Ramban’s Sefer Hag’ulah (Kithvei Haramban, Vol. I, pp. 255-295) for further elucidation of his views of the process by which the final redemption will come to pass. For the purpose of illuminating his language here, suffice it to say that Mashiach ben Yoseph — or as Ramban calls him there, “Mashiach ben Ephraim,” since Ephraim was a son of Joseph — will first accomplish the ingathering of the exiles and fight their wars. Then Mashiach ben David will come. will do with their descendants. This was why Moses strained himself in this matter.

ומטה האלוקים בידי, to show the people at what time he would be praying in order that they too would coordinate the time they offered their own prayers with that of Moses. The importance of this harmonising of prayers is demonstrated when the Talmud tells us that in the large synagogue of Alexandria they waved flags so that the people who could not hear the cantor could pray in harmony with him, nonetheless. (Sukkah 51).

ויאמר משה אל יהושע, Moses said to Joshua, etc. As soon as Moses realised that the sin for which the Israelites were being punished was their neglect of Torah he said to himself that the most suitable person to confront Amalek was Joshua. The Torah itself testifies in Exodus 33,11 that Joshua did not move from the tent as he was busy studying Torah. (the word אהל is traditionally equated with the "tent in which one studies Torah). Moses instructed Joshua to choose people of similar stature in order to overcome Amalek. It turned out that this strategy worked.

ויאמר משה אל יהושע, “Moses said to Joshua, etc.” According to Nachmanides it is clear that from this day on when he came to the special attention of Moses, Joshua bore the name Joshua instead of Hoseah. We find him referred to by this name again in Exodus 32,17 when he commented on the sound of the shouting going on in connection with the golden calf. So what do we do with the Torah telling us that prior to dispatching this man as one of the 12 spies, Moses called Hoseah Joshua? (Numbers 13,16) We must assume that the Torah uses that instance to tell us that the man now called Joshua had already experienced this name change in our portion here, as a result of having become Moses’ personal valet. As to the comment by our sages that the additional letters symbolise that his name from now mean ק-ה יושעיך, “may G’d help you!” i.e. that Moses was afraid he might otherwise be influenced by the evil advice of the ten spies, could mean that already at that early stage of the Israelites’ wanderings Moses had feared such a development. It is also possible that as of the time when Joshua became one of the twelve men chosen to spy out the land of Canaan, Moses decreed publicly that he was henceforth to be referred to exclusively as Joshua. The reason why Moses himself did not lead the people in this battle was 1) to enable him to offer the prayers for success on the hilltop, and 2) there was a longstanding tradition that Esau or his descendants would ultimately be vanquished only by a descendant of Rachel. History has born this out, as Amalek was defeated by King Sha-ul, a descendant of Binyamin (son of Rachel). The remnant of Amalek, i.e.. Haman, eventually fell into the hands of Mordechai, also a descendant of Kish, King Sha-ul’s father. Moses relying largely on prayer, was due to the fact that the Israelites were completely ignorant of the art of conducting warfare. He felt that as long as he was a visible symbol for the people they would make up in faith and dedication what they lacked in skill. It is also possible that Moses was deeply concerned that Yitzchok’s blessing that Esau and his descendants would live by the sword would now weigh heavily against the Jewish people. This was the first time that internecine war between the descendants of Yitzchok had broken out, and it would continue at intervals until when the Messiah will come and the remnants of Esau will be resoundingly defeated for the last time. The destruction of the second Temple, the exile we find ourselves in still, are all due to the descendants of Amalek/Esau, and Moses was most aware of the historical implications. [this is why we daily add the relevant verses from the Book of Ovadiah, predicting the defeat of Esau at the end of reciting the victory song by Moses over the Egyptians. Ed.]

בחר לנו אנשים, “choose men for us!” The Amalekites were expert astrologers (compare Rashi; our edition מכשפים, sorcerers). Moses meant that Joshua should select men who according to their horoscopes would not die during the current year, something Moses was aware of due to his own knowledge of astrology. The two armies facing each other would all consist of soldiers who according to their respective horoscopes would not die during that year. As a result of these considerations neither army inflicted fatal casualties on the other during this encounter. This is what is meant when the Torah reports the outcome of the battle as: “Joshua weakened Amalek and his people by the sword.” The Torah carefully refrained from mentioning that the Israelites actually killed any of the Amalekites. When Moses said to Joshua “choose for us,” he compared Joshua to himself and did not say: “choose for me!” Mechilta Amalek section 1 uses this phrase to teach: “the honor of your student should be as dear to you as your own honor.”

At the time of battle, I will stand. [Rashi knows this] because otherwise, why does it say specifically, “Tomorrow [I will stand”]? Perforce, because that is the time of battle. Rashi goes on to say, “I will stand,” to convey that “tomorrow” is connected to “I will stand.” Accordingly, the verse means: Tomorrow, at the time of battle, I will stand and pray for you. This was to encourage Yehoshua and strengthen him for battle, for he will be confident of victory due to Moshe’s prayers during the battle. But if “tomorrow” refers to the preceding, [and the verse reads: “Tomorrow go out to battle Amaleik,”] then what does [“I will stand”] come to teach us?

Moshe said to Yehoshua. Moshe’s special abilities lay in the realm of the supernatural. For this reason he conducted the wars against Sichon and Og personally, since those wars were openly miraculous. On this occasion, by contrast, Hashem hid His face so that they were required to do battle in a natural manner. Therefore Moshe delegated command to Yehoshua, who had been chosen by Hashem to lead the conquest of Canaan, which was to be accomplished through natural wars accompanied by hidden miracles. Nevertheless, Moshe helped in the battle against Amaleik through prayer and urgings to repentance in order that they would enjoy Divine favor. With the staff of Hashem. The staff was called by this name, rather than “Moshe’s staff,” whenever Hashem performed through it a miracle for which the B’nei Yisrael were not worthy, solely to display His power.

VV. 9-12. Angegriffen von Amalek, muss Israel den Kampf wagen, allein es ist nicht Israels Schwert, sondern Mosche Stab, der Amalek besiegt, und es ist nicht eine dem Stab innewohnende Wunderkraft, sondern es ist die durch die emporgehobene Hand zum Ausdruck und Bewusstsein kommende אמונה, das vertrauensvolle sich Hingeben und Anklammern an Gott, das den Sieg erstreitet. אמונה kommt so absolut als Bezeichnung des Charakters oder Inhaltes eines Subjekts vor. כל מצותיך אמונה (Ps. 119, 86), ואמונה עניתני (das. 75) dass du mir Leiden gegeben, war deinerseits אמונה. So auch hier: es war das, was seine Hände bedeuteten, אמונה. Aaron und Chur waren die Repräsentanten des Volkes Mosche zur Seite. Nicht des Führers, sondern das durch den Führer geweckte Gottvertrauen des Volkes führt zum Siege.

בחר לנו אנשים, “select for us some men!” Moses wanted men who had been born in the second month of Adar, (people born in that month were believed to be free of fear of sorcerers and witches (compare a Midrash quoted on this verse in Torah shleymah by Rabbi M. Kasher, item 58) Such people reputedly were not subject to negative influences of the twelve constellations of the zodiac. [This editor does not understand, how, seeing that the lunar calendar for the Jewish people had only been introduced a few weeks before the events in which the events related in our chapter took place, Joshua could have known who had been born during what would have been the second month of Adar. You may also find the commentary of Rabbeinu Bachya on this verse of special interest. Ed.] The Amalekites were reputed to be great astrologists, and able to foretell future events based on that. Seeing that the second month of Adar is the thirteenth month, and not governed by any constellation, people born in that month did not need to fear predetermined events they might be subject to. The sorcerers would be powerless during that month. Another interpretation of our verse: Moses instructs Joshua to mobilise a number of fighting men that would equal the ones at the disposal of the Amalekites.

וצא הלחם GO OUT, FIGHT — go out from the cloud and fight against him (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:9:3),

אנכי נצב על ראש הגבעה, “I will position myself on the summit of the hill;” Moses wanted to be able to follow the course of the battle while personally watching, and even more, so that the Israelite fighters could see their leader and be encouraged by this visual contact. We find a verse in Joshua 8,26, where the latter, by that time the leader of the Jewish people, emulated Moses’ example by not lowering his spear until victory in battle had been secured. It is a common practice in war that one of the popular heroes positions himself on a hill or tower, holding aloft a flag in order to serve as encouragement to the troops seeing that the flag is a common symbol. As long as the troops can see their flag being held aloft they derive encouragement from this. If for some reason the troops fail to see the flag being held aloft they become demoralised. Moses’ staff in this instance served as a flag for the Israelites fighting Amalek.

מחר TO-MORROW, at the time of the battle, I will take my stand.

בחר לנו אנשים CHOOSE US MEN — brave men, and men who fear sin (אנשים does not mean merely men — males, but men fit for war and at the same time God-fearing) — choose these so that their merit may stand them in good stead (cf. (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:9:2). Another explanation: בחר לנו אנשים Choose us men who know how to make witchcraft of none effect; he said this because the sons of Amalek were wizards (cf. Rashi on v. 12)

AND MOSES AND AARON AND HUR — From this we may infer as regards a public fast that three men must pass before the Holy Ark (i. e. must officiate at prayer) — we may infer this because they (the Israelites) were then engaged in fasting (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:12:5).

ומשה אהרן וחור, “and Moses, Aaron as well as Chur, etc.” according to Rashi, Chur was a son of Miriam, although in Exodus 24,14 he describes Chur as being a son of Miriam and Calev. This is based on Chronicles II 19 where Calev is described as having married Efrat, another name for Miriam, as stated in the Talmud tractate Sotah, folio 11. Why then was she called עזובה, when according to the Talmud quoted, Calev is described as having married Efrat after Azuvah, his first wife had died? How could Chur have been the son of Miriam seeing that he was the son of Efrat? I believe that Rashi’s commentary is correct and that there is no contradiction here at all. The verse in Chronicles I 2,18 described Calev the son of Chetzron siring Azuvah, “Ishah” [as if she were his wife, Ed.] and Yeriot, who in turn gave birth to Yashar, Shovav and Ardon before Azuvah had died. Thereupon Calev married Efrat who gave birth to Chur for him. Chur in turn became the father of Uri, etc. In the Talmud Sotah, Rashi states that Calev was the son of Chetzron, something that needs explaining, seeing that the Torah describes him as being the son of Yefuneh. (Numbers 13,6) Rashi considers the name “Yefuneh” as an acrostic praising the bearer of that name as not having made common cause with the spies. Still, he is also described as the son of K’naz in Joshua 15,17) According to Rava in the Talmud Sotah, folio 11, he was an adopted son of K’naz. This makes sense when we compare it with what is written in Numbers 32,12 where the name Yefuneh is linked to a member of the house of K’naz. Azuvah is identified as the same person that also appears with the name of Miriam. The reason that she was also known as Azuvah, “the abandoned one,” is because of the traumas she had experienced in her personal life. She had been afflicted with the dread disease tzoraat, as a result everyone abandoned her while she was thus afflicted. Her son had been murdered by the mob demanding to worship the golden calf. Another question concerning her is that the Torah described her as הוליד “he sired!?” She was his wife! How could she have sired anyone? Our sages say that if one marries a woman for religious reasons, in order to have G–d fearing children from her, one is considered as if one had physically sired such children.

ומשה ואהרן וחור, and Moses Aaron and Chur; seeing that the Torah will tell us about what Aaron and Chur did during that time, Chur was introduced to us here. Aaron and Chur would support Moses’ arms while Moses was standing on the summit of the hill.

חור HUR was the son of Miriam and her husband was Caleb (Sotah 11b).

ואת יריעות, “and Yeriot.” According to Rashi, Miriam also gave birth to Yeriot, though many years later, when she was already eighty years old. The commentators on Chronicles suggest that some of the names should be read as if spelled slightly differently so as to give additional meaning to them.

עלו ראש, “went up to the top.” The reason the Torah chose the word ראש, instead of פסגה, “summit,” or a similar word, is to tell the reader that they appealed to G–d to remember the merits of the nation’s spiritual founding fathers, the patriarchs, when helping them against Amalek.

The choice of the feminine noun: גבעה, “hill,” implies a reminder to G–d of the matriarchs and their merits.

כאשר ירים משה ידו WHEN MOSES LIFTED UP HIS HAND — But could Moses’ hands win the battle etc.? See the whole passage as it is given in the Treatise Rosh Hashanah 29a.

AND WHEN HE LET DOWN HIS HAND, AMALEK PREVAILED. By way of the plain meaning of Scripture, when Moses was compelled to lower his hands because of weariness, he saw that Amalek prevailed. He then commanded Aaron and Hur to support them, and thus he would not lower them again. Our Rabbis have said in the Midrash:⁴⁶³Sefer Habahir, 138. “Did Moses cause Amalek to prevail over Israel? It was merely because a person is forbidden to tarry three hours with his hands spread heavenward.”⁴⁶⁴See my Hebrew commentary for a quote from the Cabalistic work of the Tziyoni for an explanation of this doctrine. In his commentary on the Sefer Habahir (p. 61, Note 4), Reuben Margoliot quotes from the Commentary of the Vilna Gaon on Proverbs (25:17) that “one must not pray [any given Service] more than three hours.”

כאשר ירים משה ידו, and his staff.

וכאשר יניח ידו, “and whenever he allowed his hand to rest,” according to the plain meaning of the text it was simply physically impossible for Moses to maintain a posture with raised hands all day long. Whenever he was too tired to maintain his posture, the battle tended to favour the Amalekites. This is why he commanded Aaron and Chur to assist him in maintaining the posture with his hands raised in support of his prayer. According to the Midrash, where the question is asked rhetorically whether Moses’ hands determined the outcome of the battle, the answer given is that Moses was not suffering from physical fatigue, but that it is forbidden for any man to keep his hands outstretched in prayer for three hours or more without a break. [It is an aspect of עיון תפילה, praying “insistently,” something most unbecoming for man in his relation to his Creator. Ed.] Rabbi Joseph Kimchi explains that the words וכאשר יניח ידו do not describe something that Moses actually did, but these words describe that Moses knew that he could not afford to allow his hands to rest, else Amalek would prove victor, and that in order to forestall such an eventuality, he took Aaron and Chur with him from the start to help him support his hands. Some commentators understand Moses’ raising his hands as referring to the hands with which he was holding his staff as a sign of encouragement to the people. Moses’ staff meant for the people what the flag means to gentile troops. Generally, the purpose of the flag is to serve as a point around which the troops position themselves, to prevent being scattered by opposing forces. The description of Moses being placed in an elevated position even while seated, is to signify that Moses performed the function that a flag normally performs in a battle. This explains why Moses called the altar he built after the battle ה' ניסי. He did not want the people to think that their victory had been due to the visibility of Moses’ staff during the battle, but that it was exclusively due to the help of Hashem, without which the staff would not have proven effective at all. Israel’s “flag” is its faith in Hashem.

(Ibid. 11) "And it was, when Moses lifted his hand, that Israel prevailed, etc." Now do the hands of Moses strengthen Israel or break Amalek? Rather, whenever Moses lifted his hand heavenward, they gazed at it and affirmed their faith in Him who commanded Moses to do thus, and the Holy One Blessed be He wrought for them miracles and mighty acts. Similarly, (Numbers 21:8) "Make for yourself a saraf (a fiery serpent), etc." Now does a snake put to death or bring to life? Rather, whenever he did so, Israel would gaze at it and affirm their faith in Him who commanded Moses to do thus, and the Holy One Blessed be He wrought healings for them. Similarly, (Exodus 12:13) "And the blood shall be for you as a sign, etc." Now how can the blood affect an angel or Israel? Rather, when Israel did this and placed the blood on their doors, the Holy One Blessed be He pitied them, viz. (Ibid. 23) "And the L rd shall skip over the door." R. Eliezer says: What is the intent of "and Israel will grow strong" or "and Amalek will grow strong"? __ Whenever Moses would raise his hands heavenward, Israel strengthened themselves in words of Torah, which were destined to be given by his hands. And whenever he lowered his hands, Israel weakened in words of Torah, which were destined to be given by his hands.

וגבר ישראל, it is a psychological axiom that when the warriors see their flag being held aloft they are inspired with additional courage. When they cannot see their flag being held aloft they interpret this negatively and are liable to flee from the battlefield.

וידי משה כבדים BUT MOSES HANDS BECAME HEAVY — Because he had shown himself remiss in the duty that was his, of waging war himself against Amalek, and had appointed another in his stead, his hands became heavy (cf. (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:12:1).

AND HIS HANDS WERE ‘EMUNAH’. This means that they remained steadily uplifted. The usage of the word is similar to the expressions: ‘va’amanah’ (And a sure) ordinance concerning the singers, as every day required;⁴⁶⁵Nehemiah 11:23. And yet for all this we make ‘amanah’ (a sure) covenant,⁴⁶⁶Ibid., 10:1. meaning a provision “fixed” by covenant. Similarly, a peg fastened in a place ‘ne’eman’⁴⁶⁷Isaiah 22:23. means [sure and] strong.
By way of the Truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], Moses lifted his ten fingers to the height of heaven⁴⁶⁸See Proverbs 25:3. in order to allude to the ten emanations and to cleave firmly to Him Who fights for Israel.⁴⁶⁹Deuteronomy 3:22, For the Eternal your G-d, He it is that fighteth for you. Here is explained the matter of uplifting of hands during the blessing of the priests, and its secret.⁴⁷⁰By uplifting their ten fingers, which allude to the ten emanations, the priests point to the Most High One Whose beneficence is brought down through them to the world by the priestly benediction (L’vush Ha’orah explaining the Ricanti, who quotes the language of Ramban).

אמונה; keeping them steady. We find a parallel to this in Isaiah 22,23 ותקעתיו יתד במקום נאמן, ”I will fix him as a peg in a firm place.” Also in Psalms 100,5 and in Deuteronomy 28,59 we find aimilar syntax.

ויהי ידיו אמונה, “His hands ‘was’ steadfast.” Ibn Ezra explains the singular mode of ויהי instead of ויהיו as referring to each of Moses’ individual hands separately. Other commentators justify the singular mode by saying that Moses’ hands appeared to the onlookers as if they had been fused to be one single hand. Yet other commentators claim that the word אמונה refers to the faith displayed by the people. Still another commentator compares the expression to what we read in Meggilat Esther about Mordechai’s relationship to Esther, his niece. The text there is: ויהי אומן, “he had adopted her,” as if we were to say that someone supported someone else by carrying them on his hands.

ומזה אחד, “and from this (side) one.” This verse illustrates that when Moses spread out his hands toward heaven in prayer while he was on top of the hill, Aaron stood on his right and Chur on his left. When one raises one’s ten fingers one receives the power of divine support between these fingers. This is an example of what is called the קו האמצעי, by means of which the prophetic power sought by the supplicant is received via the Seraphim (angels) which are above him. [According to Remak (Rabbi Moshe Cordovero) this “line” is the central conduit of celestial input into the terrestrial world. Ed] We find elsewhere also that the deputy of the High Priest would be positioned on his right whereas the next lower ranking dignitary the אב בית דין would be positioned on his left (Yuma 37). Moses followed this pattern. Nonetheless, the infusion of celestial input occurs directly via the one who carries on the battle, i.e. Moses against the spiritual head of Amalek.

Moshe was. . . hands were with faithfulness. Rashi is answering the question: [If ויהי refers to Moshe’s hands] why did it not say ויהיו , [the plural form, rather than ויהי ]? Thus Rashi explains that ויהי refers to Moshe, not to his hands.

וידי משה כבדים “and Moses’ hands became heavy;” it was tiresome for Moses to have to stand all day long, as we know from verse 9 where he announced that on the following day he would take up a position on the top of the hill, and it would be difficult for him to keep his hands lifted upwards all day long. Aaron and Chur provided a stone for Moses to sit on; and they supported his arms from either side so that he could keep holding his staff aloft. All of this was necessary in order that the people would not become demoralised. The expression: אמונה, describes anything that does not weaken or decrease in size when remaining in the same position for a long time, such as from morning to evening. An example of the meaning of אמונה what we described are found in Isaiah 22,23: ותקעתיו יתד במקום נאמן, “I will fix him as a peg in a firm place.” There are numerous other examples of this kind. Moses’ doing this enabled Joshua to weaken the Amalekites and their troops. Once the Torah writes of ידו, “his hand”, singular mode, and another time it writes ידיו, “his hands,” plural mode. At the beginning of the battle Moses raised only one of his hands, while lowering his second hand; eventually both of his hands had become too heavy for him to keep aloft without someone supporting them. In the Midrash quoted in Torah shleymah item 94, in the name of several well known commentators, none of whom have revealed the name of that Midrash, we find the following interpretation of the words in this paragraph: the word אמונה, is a reminder of Avraham who had been complimented by G-d on his emunah, “faith,” already in Genesis chapter 15. When Moses’ prayer on behalf of his people embattled against Amalek had not elicited a response from Hashem, he appealed to the forefather Avraham to join his plea. The words: עד בא, are a hint that he similarly turned to the Jewish people’s forefather Yitzchok, of whom we read that he had returned from prayer at the well where Hagar’s prayer had been answered. (Genesis 24,62). The words: עד בוא השמש, are a reminder of our forefather Yaakov who had prematurely spent a night at Luz where he had his first prophetic revelation in the dream with the ladder. (Genesis 28,11 כי בא השמש). Moses called on the combined merits of all three forefathers to reinforce his prayer. Our author quotes from Genesis 49,22 and Samuel I4,15, as well as from Joshua 20,9, that the word אמונה applied here to both of Moses’ hands, is a legitimate mode of the feminine mode corresponding to the masculine plural mode of the word אמונים.

ויקחו AND THEY TOOK — Aaron and Hur took —

אמונה, ”steadfast.” As in Nechemyah 10,1 אנחנו כרתים אמונה, “we make this pledge, etc.” This matter will endure. Some commentators view the word אמונה here as a promise to Israel that they would emerge victorious. Others view the words as derived from אומן in the sense of the artist who possesses special skills, able to perform tasks others are unable to perform as they are not as gifted with skill and imagination. Moses excelled in both spheres. According to the Midrash, the word refers to Moses invoking the merit of the patriarchs who, thanks to their abiding faith in G’d, had left us a heritage of merits that we can call on when the situation demands it. The term והאמין בה'appears first in connection with Avraham in Genesis 15, “He had abiding faith in the G’d Who promised that his children would inherit the land of Canaan at a time when Avraham did not even have any children yet.”

Faithful and well-intended prayer. [ תפלה נכונה ] means: focused prayer. [Maharshal]

אבן וישימו תחתיו A STONE AND THEY PUT IT UNDER HIM [AND HE SAT THEREON] — but he did not seat himself upon a cushion or a pillow, for he said, “Israel is in tribulation; I will be in tribulation together with them”. (Taanit 11a).

ויהי ידיו אמונה (lit., and he was, his hands faithfulness) — and Moses was in the condition that his hands were in faithfulness — spread forth to heaven in a confident and firm prayer.

עד בא השמש UNTIL THE GOING DOWN OF THE SUN — Because the Amalekites had calculated the hours by astrology, as to which hour they would prove victorious, Moses held back the sun against them and brought the hours into confusion (Midrash Tanchuma, Beshalach 28).

ויחלש יהושע AND JOSHUA DISCOMFITED [AMALEK] (more lit., he weakened Amalek) — he cut off the heads of his mighty men and left only the weak amongst them, and he did not kill all of them (leaving the weak men alive: thus Amalek was made weak, and powerless for further mischief). From this we may learn that they acted according to the expressed pronouncement of the Shechina (otherwise they would, in the stress of battle, not have so discriminated) (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:13:2).

את עמלק ואת עמו, fellow travelers from other nations who had joined Amalek in his attack against the Israelites.

ויחלש, he defeated them. The word חלושה in the same sense occurs in Exodus 32,18 when Moses describes the noise he hears when descending from Mount Sinai as not being typical of the sounds one hears from soldiers suffering a defeat.

ויחלוש יהושע, “Joshua succeeded in weakening, etc.” He did not kill the Amalekites. Some commentators claim that the soldiers that the Amalekites had dispatched against Israel were demons, sorcerers, whom it was impossible to kill by normal means as they employed all kinds of sorcery.

And left only. . . Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written, “Yehoshua weakened. . . with the edge of the sword”? If Yehoshua killed with the sword, then they were not weakened but killed. Therefore Rashi explains, “And left only the weak. . .”

V. 13. חלש ,ויחלש : während חלץ das Lösen eines hemmenden Bandes, somit ein Freimachen bedeutet, heißt חלש das Lösen der natürlichen zusammenhaltenden Kraft, somit: schwächen. Josua schwächte nur Amalek. Seine endliche Besiegung bleibt der fernen Zukunft vorbehalten. Ist ja auch Israel noch nicht reif. Bis zu Israels Reife ist selbst für Israels entwickelnde Erziehung der Gegensatz Amalek notwendig.

ויחלוש, ”he threw a lot;” when Haman was described as looking for a suitable date to decree the destruction of the Jewish people he did so also. (Esther 3,7) There are three different words for lots which appear at different points in the Bible, (גורל, פור, חולש (ישעיה 14,14. Alternate explanation: Instead of using the customary ויכה, “he smote,” the Torah used a word meaning “he weakened,” as Amalek had read in his astrological calendar where it was indicated that not all of its soldiers would die as a result of that war. Joshua used the same method (verse 9) where he is described as selecting a relatively small number of men of military age to confront Amalek. He did not kill the Amalekites on this occasion but only disabled them from fighting by cutting of their hands or feet. Hence the verb ויחלוש is most appropriate.

ויחלוש יהושע את עמלק, “Joshua succeeded in weakening the armies of Amalek.” [In order to understand the following it is important to realise that in this battle we do not hear of either side suffering fatalities. The word חרב, for “lethal sword,” does not appear once. Ed. The Amalekites had employed the weapon of sorcery in order to weaken the Jewish people. The swords used had not caused a single death, hence the Torah only speaks of the Amalekites having been “weakened.”Another interpretation of the unusual expression: ויחלוש. This term was used since the Torah had previously written that when Moses’ hands had weakened וגבר עמלק, “Amalek was gaining the upper hand,” it was appropriate to use a word meaning the opposite after the battle ended, i.e. while the Israelites had gotten the upper hand, they had only succeeded in beating off the attack. On the other hand, there is an instance where the expression ויחלוש, is used as describing someone dying, i.e. וגבר ימות ויחלש, (Job 14,9).

From this we may conclude. . . Meaning: Hashem’s command was not mentioned at the beginning of this war. Rather, it is written “Moshe said to Yehoshua” (v. 9), as if Moshe commanded him on his own. Thus Rashi explains that Moshe acted according to Hashem’s command. And the proof is from our verse, for if it was not according to Hashem’s specific command, then Yehoshua [who was able to kill the mighty ones] would not have left the weak ones alive, but he would have killed them all.

כתב זאת זכרון WRITE THIS FOR A MEMORIAL, that Amalek came to wage war against Israel before any other nation.

WRITE THIS FOR A MEMORIAL IN THE BOOK. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented⁴⁷¹This quote from Ibn Ezra is found in his commentary to Numbers 21:14. Part of it is also found here. that “this was a known book, namely, the book of the wars of the Eternal,⁴⁷²Numbers 21:14. which contained the history of the wars which G-d fought for those that fear Him, and it is possible that the history began from the time of Abraham.” There is nothing in these words of his but an opportunity [to say something without due consideration].⁴⁷³It should be pointed out that in his commentary to the Book of Numbers (ibid), Ramban agrees with Ibn Ezra’s comment, by way of the plain meaning of Scripture. This is because it distinctly says there, the book of the wars of the Eternal. Here, however, it just says in the book. Hence Ramban rejects Ibn Ezra’s interpretation that here too it refers to that book of the wars of the Eternal, which is no longer extant, and he proposes his own interpretation, as explained in the text.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that the word, baseifer (in the book), alludes to the Book of the Law, something like that which is written, Take this Book of the Law.⁴⁷⁴Deuteronomy 31:26. He is thus stating: “Write this in the Book of My Law so that the children of Israel should remember what Amalek did, for I will utterly blot out his remembrance, and I will lay My vengeance upon him by the hand of My people Israel.”⁴⁷⁵See Ezekiel 25:14. This is the commandment we find written in the Book of Deuteronomy: Remember what Amalek did unto thee.⁴⁷⁶Deuteronomy 25:17. He said, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua, to command him to remind Israel of all the travail that had come upon them because of Amalek, for he [Joshua] knows and is witness.⁴⁷⁷See Jeremiah 29:23. G-d is thus hinting that after the conquest of the Land, they would blot out Amalek, for the first commandment upon them was to destroy the seven nations⁴⁷⁸Deuteronomy 7:1-2. and take possession of the Land. This is Scripture’s intent in what is said there: And it shall be when the Eternal thy G-d hath given thee rest from all thine enemies… that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek.⁴⁷⁹Ibid., 25:19. Now had it been like this in the days of Joshua the son of Nun, he would have urged them on to blot out Amalek, but in his days, a good deal of the Land remained to be possessed,⁴⁸⁰See Joshua 13:1. and the time for the fulfilling of the commandment did not come until the reign of Saul.⁴⁸¹See I Samuel, Chapter 15.

כתוב זאת זכרון בספר, a reference to the portion in Deuteronomy 25,17-19.

ושים באזני יהושע, "and read it aloud to Joshua, etc." We need to understand why G'd instructed Moses to address this message only to Joshua. Perhaps the reason was the fact that despite Joshua's valiant efforts to overcome Amalek he had succeeded only in weakening him. Joshua became unduly concerned that G'd had not wiped out Amalek as He had wiped out the Egyptian army. G'd therefore wanted to reassure him. By telling Moses to be sure to make Joshua hear this message, G'd wanted to tell him that He, G'd, had heard Joshua's unspoken concern. He told Joshua not to worry, that in due course He would wipe out Amalek completely from beneath the sky.

באזני יהושע, that he shall prevail over them when he will be king and keep My commandment to wipe out the name of Amalek.

כתוב זאת זכרון בספר, “record this in a book for remembrance in the future.” Ibn Ezra writes that the book referred to is the one also known as מלחמות ה', “the Lord’s wars,” a book which has disappeared in the course of time. Nachmanides writes that what Ibn Ezra writes here is pure speculation, and that the book referred to is the Torah itself. [he bases himself on the vowel patach under the letter ב in the word בספר, which describes a well known book. Ed.] Compare Deut. 31,26 לקוח את ספר התורה הזה, “to take this Book of the Torah.” G’d commanded Moses to incorporate this historical item in the holy Torah so that the Israelites would forever remember the totally unprovoked attack by Amalek that they had had to endure. This is just another aspect of the commandment at the end of Parshat Ki Tetze, to wipe out the memory of the people of Amalek totally and irreversibly, once the time had come when we were at peace and genocide could not longer be considered an act of revenge motivated by personal motives. (Deut.25,17-19) When the Torah here instructs Moses ושים באזני יהושע, “make sure that Joshua hears it well,” this is because the commandment would not become operative until after the Jewish people were settled in their own land, so that Moses, who was not going to take them into that land, would not have a share in performing this commandment. [if not for the sin of the golden calf and that of the spies, carrying out the commandment might not have had to wait until the Jewish people had appointed a king for themselves, well over 300 years after Joshua’s death. Ed.] Seeing that Joshua left much of the land of Canaan unconquered at the time of his death, the commandment in accordance with Deut.25 could not yet have become operative.

כי מחה אמחה, “for I will utterly wipe out, etc.” The first word מחה refers to the elimination of Amalek’s patron in the celestial spheres, the second i.e. אמחה, refers to the wiping out of the forces and influence of Amalek on earth. This reflects what our sages have said (Devarim Rabbah 1,19) that prior to destroying a nation on earth G’d always first deals with its patron in the celestial spheres. They base this on Isaiah 34,5: ”For My sword shall be drunk in the heaven,” followed by: “it shall come down upon Edom, upon the people I have doomed.”
A Midrashic view: The words כי מחה refer to what G’d does to Amalek in this life; the word אמחה refers to what G’d will do to Amalek in the hereafter (Mechilta Amalek section 2). The words מתחת השמים are a reference to Lamentations 3,66 where Jeremiah prayed: “Oh, pursue them in wrath and destroy them from beneath the heavens of the Lord.”

V. 14. בַספר, in das Buch der Lehre und des Gesetzes ושים וגו׳: und was du allgemein zum Gedächtnis niedergeschrieben hast, das übermittle erklärt und entwickelt dem Geiste Josuas. Wir haben hier für ein geschichtliches Moment כתב und בעל פה wie für das Gesetz. Vergl. ואלה המשפטים אשר תשים לפניהם (Kap. 21, 1). — את זכר עמלק. Nicht Amalek ist das Verderbliche, das Andenken, das Ruhmesgedächtnis Amaleks ist das Verderbliche für die sittliche Zukunft der Menschheit. So lange die Annalen der Menschheit das Gedächtnis der Helden des Schwertes mit Ruhm bedecken, so lange Würger und Mörder des Menschenheils nicht in Vergessenheit begraben werden, so lange blickt jedes jüngere Geschlecht bewundernd zu diesen Größen der Gewalt hinauf und weckt deren Andenken die Lust zu gleicher Gewalt und gleichem Ruhm. Erst wenn das göttliche Sittengesetz das einzige Maß für Kleinstes und Größtes geworden und nicht in umgekehrtem, sondern in gleichem Verhältnis der Anspruch des Sittlichen wächst mit der Größe und der Macht, und je größer und mächtiger der Mensch, um so weniger eine Versündigung gegen das Sittengesetz entschuldbar gefunden wird, und Verbrechen Großer und Mächtiger um so tiefer mit Abscheu erfüllen: erst dann wird Amaleks Reich auf Erden für immer dahin sein. Dass dies das endliche Ziel der Gotteswaltung in der Geschichte sei, das hat Gott hier nach der ersten Schwächung Amaleks ausgesprochen: "Auslöschen, auslöschen werde ich das Andenken Amaleks, so weit der Himmel reicht." — So ist auch Ps. 9, 7 der Gedanke prägnant ausgesprochen, daß erst mit dem Untergang des Gedächtnisses der Verheerungen und Eroberungen, diese selbst von der Erde verschwunden sein werden: אבד זכרם המה!

כי מחה אמחה, “for I will completely wipe out, etc.” the repetition of the verb is to tell us that both in this world and in the world to come there will eventually remain no descendants of Amalek.

כתוב, “record in writing!” but not only orally; if this piece of history would be handed down from father to son only orally, it would be exposed to becoming forgotten in the course of time.[When G-d eventually commanded King Shaul to carry out the commandment to wipe out Amalek, and that nation had not had any contact with the Jewish people for 200 years, none of the Israelites would have understood why they had to commit this kind of genocide. Ed.] The written Torah itself had foretold in Deuteronomy25,19, that this commandment would be carried out only after the Jewish people faced no more enemies all around it.

ושים באזני יהושע AND PUT INTO THE EARS OF JOSHUA, who will bring Israel into the Holy Land, that he must command Israel to pay him his recompense. Here it was intimated to Moses (by the mere statement that Joshua should in some future time carry out the injunction to destroy Amalek) that Joshua would bring Israel into the Holy Land (cf. (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 17:14:1).

ושים באזני יהושע, make sure that Joshua remembers all this. Moses carried out this command by building the altar and offering up the prayer declaring G’d as his flag.

כי מחה אמחה, “for I will surely erase, etc.” The reason why Amalek’s deed evoked such a violent response from G’d was that as a result of the drowning of the Egyptians in the sea the whole of mankind including the leaders of Edom, the descendants of Esau, had suddenly been in awe of the power of Hashem. The fact that Amalek had broken this spell by attacking G’d’s people, set back the timetable of the kingdom of G’d on earth to such an extent that the people responsible for this could not be allowed to remain part of mankind’s history. We need to understand why here G’d is portrayed as wiping out the memory of Amalek, whereas in Deut. 25,19 this task is one assigned to the Jewish people. Why is this? Some commentators understand this as follows. As long as the Romans had not destroyed the Temple, the task of wiping out Amalek was that of G’d’s people. After G’d’s people had become weakened by loss of the Temple and their independence, it was left to G’d Himself to complete the destruction of Amalek. The Midrash explains the apparent anomaly differently; G’d says to the Jewish people that if they will do their best to eradicate the influence of Amalek in the terrestrial world, He on His part, will eradicate any trace of him in the celestial spheres.

The repetition of the words מחה אמחה, may be an allusion to two occasions when a major battle would be fought against Amalek, one by King Saul, the other by Mordechai. The third and last such battle will occur prior to the coming of the Messiah.

את זכר עמלק, the word זכר is a reference to Haman, the word Amalek is to be understood at face value.

זאת זכרון בספר, “this atrocity that the Amalektites had committed against the Jewish people, attacking it in the desert, without any provocation whatsoever. Our descendants when the time came must have a written record of this dastardly attack on perfectly harmless people who had never attacked anyone. זכרון בספר, “a written record as a reminder;” the prefix ב with the vowel patach, meant that this book already existed, and was known as 'ספר מלחמות ה, “the book recording wars fought by or on behalf of Hashem;” it is only due to our sins that this book has not been preserved, just as the book known as sefer hayashar is also no longer in our possession. Another book no longer in our possession is the book written by the prophet Iddo, as recorded in Chronicles II 13,22 by its author Ezra. There were also written records known as the history of the kings of Israel (Kings I 14, 1929) as well as the books of Solomon (Kings I 5,12) (Compare Ibn Ezra on this)

כי מחה אמחה BECAUSE I WOULD UTTERLY BLOT OUT [THE REMEMBRANCE OF AMALEK] — the reason why I admonish you thus is because (כי) I desire to blot it out.

מחה אמחה את זכר עמלק, not only the people but even their livestock. We know this from the instructions given by the prophet Samuel to King Sha-ul in Samuel 15,3 where the king is ordered to destroy utterly all the possessions of Amalek.

ושים באזני יהושע, “and commit it orally to Joshua;” he who had begun to carry out the commandment of wiping out Amalek deserves the credit to see to it that this book is handed down from generation to generation until a king will arise in Israel who will complete the task that Joshua began. G-d warns the people not to be astounded at the absolute harshness of this command Neither are we to assume that there had been military encounters between the Israelites and the Amalekites until some 400 years later years later under King Shaul. There had not been any. The unforgivable sin of the Amalekites was that when after the Israelites had crossed the sea of reeds and the Egyptians drowned in pursuit, when all the surrounding nations had been so impressed and lived in trepidation so that they were ready to accept the universal kingdom of heaven, this nation had appeared to show them that one could stand up against the chosen people and survive such an encounter, i.e. that their G-d was not invincible.

ויקרא שמו AND HE CALLED HIS (or its) NAME — the name of the altar,

ויקרא שמו, he called the name of G’d in his prayer ה' ניסי. The matter is similar to the prophet Jeremiah saying in Lamentations 3,25: קראתי שמך ה'. Surely, there was nothing new in Jeremiah knowing the name of G’d. The point is that he addressed this attribute of G’d in that prayer. Moses addressed the attribute of G’d as the flag-bearer in Israel’s wars.

הי נס, the staff of G’d [in Moses’ hand Ed.] had become a miracle or equivalent to a flag, (an inspiration) on the hill on which Moses was positioned. Moses prayed that G’d would also use it in this manner in the future in order to conduct the war against Amalek, because G’d had already now given the commandment and assurance that He would completely wipe out even the memory of Amalek [this being the inspiration of the anti God forces on earth. Ed.] This is also what is spelled out in verse 16. 'ויאמר כי יד על כס י-ה וגו, this is why I call the altar ה' נסי, “G’d is my banner, my flag.” This is the same as when a father calls his son Eliezer, which means the same thing in Hebrew. (compare Exodus 18,4 where the reason for Moses calling his son by that name is explained.) Also the name Emanuel means the same, i.e. two words עמנו א-ל, “G’d is with us.” (Isaiah 7,14) G’d raised His hand in an oath, swearing by His throne that He would conduct ongoingמלחמה לה' בעמלק מדר דר, war against Amalek throughout the generations until he would be wiped out completely. Invoking the word יד here in connection with G’d’s utterance (as opposed to visible action) is the same as the line כי אשא אל שמים ידי, “I raise My hand to heaven” in Deuteronomy 32,40 it clearly is the formula for G’d swearing an oath. This is the plain meaning of these words. There are some who explain that when a king will sit on the throne of Israel, such as King Sha-ul, the time will have come to wipe out Amalek completely. I cannot accept this interpretation at all, as if it were correct, the Torah should have written כי תהיה יד אל כס י-ה “when the throne of Israel will be occupied by a real powerful king, representing G’d on earth.” The meaning of the words כי יד על כס י-ה is: “whenever a deliberate threat is posed against the kingdom of G’d on earth, etc.”

(Exodus 17:15) "And Moses built an altar and he called its name 'the L rd is my miracle.'" Moses (hereby) said: The miracle that the L rd wrought (for me) — He wrought it for Himself (i.e., for the sanctification of His name.) And thus do you find: Whenever a miracle is performed for Israel, that miracle, as it were, is before Him — "The L rd is my miracle." (Isaiah 63:9) "In all of their afflictions, He was afflicted." Joy to Israel — Joy to Him. (I Samuel 2:1) "I rejoice in Your salvation!"

V. 15. ויבן משה מזבח. Wie Jakob, nachdem er im nächtlichen Kampfe mit Amaleks Genius den Namen Israel errungen, im Bewusstsein dieses Namens einen "Altar zum Denkmal" baute ויצב שם מזבה. (Bamidbar 33, 20 siehe das.) und sich damit den Zuruf verewigte: אל אלקי ישראל: so baut auch hier Mosche nach dem ersten Siege über Amalek und nach der ihm offenbar gewordenen Bedeutung dieses Sieges einen "Altar zum Denkmal". Amaleks Größe ist "Zerstörung": Israels Sendung heißt "Bauen", und zwar der friedliche, menschliche Aufbau alles Irdischen zu Gott. Dieser Altarbau, diese endliche Erhebung der ganzen Erde zu einem Gottesaltare ist der Gegensatz zu Amaleks Schwert (vergl. Kap. 20, 22). Dieser Moschealtar in der Wüste beginnt den Kampf mit Amalek; darum nannte er ihn: ד׳ נסי, Gott ruft mich in den Kampf, und zeigt mir, wo ich kämpfen soll. נס ist keine Waffe und kein Schutz, נס ist das hoch emporgehaltene Zeichen, das dem Kämpfer Richtung und Ort des zu bestehenden Kampfes zeigt. Das Werk, das Gott durch Mosche beginnen und begründen ließ, hat nicht nur die Konstituierung Israels nach Innen zum Ziele. Der göttliche Aufbau alles Menschlichen in Israel hat die Bekämpfung und Überwindung alles Ungöttlichen und Unmenschlichen auf Erden zum Ziele. Dieser Bau greift nicht an, aber er wird angegriffen, wie von Amalek hier, und in dem Kampfe seiner Verteidigung geht Amalek zu Grunde.

ויבן שם מזבח, “he built an altar there; Moses built the altar at the bottom of Mount Chorev.

ה׳ נסי (lit., the Lord is my banner or my miracle) — The Holy One, blessed be He, here performed a miracle for us. It does not mean that the altar was named ה׳, “the Lord, my banner”, but the reason for so calling it was that anyone mentioning the altar’s name would thereby remember the miracle which the Omni-present had performed, since he would be saying: the Lord, He is our Miracle (cf. Rashi on Genesis 33:20).

ה' נסי, “G’d is my exaltation.” The meaning is similar to Psalms 60,6 נתת ליראיך נס להתנוסס מפני קשט סלה, “You have given a banner to them that fear You, to raise themselves to its height before the might of wisdom.” In other words, the psalmist says that G’d will lend him the strength to cope with anyone trying to attack him and to overcome him. The same thought is expressed in Psalms 44,6 בשמך נבוס קמינו, “with the help of Your name we will vanquish those who rise up against us.”

ויקרא את שמר: ה' נסי, “he named it: “Hashem is My banner.” According to Rabbi Eliezer hamoda-i, the subject of the words “he named it” was the Lord Himself. Rashi points out that we know of something similar from Genesis 33,20: In that verse we read that Yaakov, after being the first Jew to be able to buy a piece of land in the Holy Land (apart from the tomb of Sarah) built an altar and when the Torah reports that that altar was called: א-ל אלוקי ישראל, that was the name given to this altar by Hashem.

ויאמר AND HE SAID — i. e. Moses said.

FOR THE HAND UPON ‘KEIS Y-AH’ (THE THRONE OF THE ETERNAL). “The hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, is raised to swear by His throne that He will maintain [a state of] war and enmity against Amalek forever. Now what is the significance of the word keis, and why does it not say kisei [as usual]? Furthermore, even the Divine Name is divided into half!⁴⁸²The Tetragrammaton consists of four letters, while here only the first two letters are mentioned. [The answer is that] the Holy One, blessed be He, swore that the throne will not be perfect and the Name will not be full until He will blot out the name of Amalek the son of Esau.⁴⁸³Amalek was a grandson of Esau (Genesis 36:12). And when his name will be blotted out, then will G-d’s Name be full and the throne perfect, as it is said, The foe — they are destroyed; perpetual ruins.⁴⁸⁴Psalms 9:7. [This refers to Esau,⁴⁸⁵In our Rashi: “Amalek.” of whom it is said, And he kept his wrath for ever.]⁴⁸⁶Amos 1:11. Their very memorial is perished.⁴⁸⁴Psalms 9:7. What is written after that? And the Eternal is enthroned for ever.⁴⁸⁷Psalms 9:8. Thus you see [that after Amalek’s memory has perished], G-d’s Name is full. He hath established ‘kis’o’ (His throne) for judgment.⁴⁸⁷Psalms 9:8. Thus you see that the throne will be perfect.” Thus far the language of Rashi, and it is a Midrash of the Sages.⁴⁸⁸Tanchuma, Ki Theitzei 11.
Some scholars⁴⁸⁹Mentioned in Ibn Ezra in the name of Rabbi Yeshuah. explain the verse as meaning that “when there will be a ‘hand,’ [i.e., king, as explained further], upon the throne of the Eternal,⁴⁹⁰The expression found in this verse before us. the Eternal will have war with Amalek, and so shall it be from generation to generation.” The purport of this is that when there will be a king in Israel sitting upon the throne of the Eternal,⁴⁹⁰The expression found in this verse before us. he shall wage war against Amalek, thus alluding to Saul, the first king [of Israel]. And so shall it continue from generation to generation, that every king of Israel shall be duty-bound to fight with them until their name will extinct.
The following is also a Midrash of the Gemara,⁴⁹¹See Seder Bo, Note 204. as found in [Tractate Sanhedrin] in the chapter of the High Priest:⁴⁹²Sanhedrin 20b. See also Maimonides’ “The Commandments,” I, pp. 202-203. “By saying, The hand upon the throne of the Eternal: the Eternal will have war with Amalek from generation to generation, Scripture intimates that the Israelites must first appoint a king over themselves [before they are to annihilate the offspring of Amalek], for the throne of the Eternal refers only to the king, as it is said, Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Eternal.⁴⁹³I Chronicles 29:23. Ramban thus brought proof to the opinion of those scholars mentioned above, who interpret this verse as containing a hint that the reckoning with Amalek is to be deferred until there will be a king in Israel. In line with the plain meaning of Scripture, this is correct.
And by way of the Truth, [that is, the mystic lore of the Cabala, the verse is to be understood as meaning] that the Hand, [i.e., the attribute of justice], which is upon the throne of Y-ah, and which is the war from the Eternal, will continue with Amalek from generation to generation, for the high attribute of justice will pursue his extinction forever from generation to generation. The Midrash of the Sages [mentioned above] concerning “the full Divine Name” and “the perfect throne” allude to this [interpretation by way of the Truth].
Now the reason for the punishment of Amalek, i.e., why punitive measures were meted out to him more than to all other nations, is that when all the nations heard [of G-d’s visitation upon the Egyptians], they trembled. Philistia, Edom, and Moab and the inhabitants of Canaan melted away⁴⁹⁴Above, 15:14-15. from before the terror of the Eternal, and from the Glory of His majesty,⁴⁹⁵Isaiah 2:10. whereas Amalek came from afar as if to make himself master over G-d. It is for this reason that it is said concerning him, and he feared not G-d.⁴⁹⁶Deuteronomy 25:18. Besides, he was a descendant of Esau and related to us,⁴⁹⁷As a relative he was obligated to show kindness towards us. Instead, he behaved very cruelly: he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost, all that were enfeebled in thy rear, when thou was faint and weary (ibid.) a passer-by who meddles with a quarrel not his own.⁴⁹⁸Proverbs, 26:17. Amalek had no reason to fear attacks from Israel, as they were not bent on taking his land. Amalek’s interposition was thus “meddling with a quarrel not his own.”
Yithro

ויאמר כי יד על כס י-ה, Moses explains the reason and purpose of his prayer being the fact that G’d Himself had sworn an oath to remain at war with Amalek from generation to generation. If G’d is at war with that nation, we as G’d’s representative on earth, must certainly also be at war with that nation. It is what our sages referred to when they said that three commandments cannot be fulfilled until the Jewish people are securely settled in the land of Israel, 1) appointment of a king; 2) destroying the last vestiges of Amalek; 3) the building of a permanent Temple. Moses therefore had prayed for the time when these three hallmarks of Jewish history could be attained. (Sanhedrin 20)

כי יד על כס ק-ה, “for as long as a hand had been raised against the throne of G’d, etc.” according to Rashi this is in the nature of an oath by G’d. Some commentators view it as a prediction, i.e. as long as a “hand” is raised against the throne of G’d disputing His right to rule the world, G’d is forced to wage war against Amalek. This will continue in this manner until, eventually, Israel will utterly destroy Amalek and wipe his memory from the slate of history.

The hand of Hashem. . . Rashi is resolving several issues. First, he says, “The hand of Hashem,” because the unidentified hand mentioned in the verse seems to mean Moshe’s hand. Second, he says, “Is raised,” to convey that Hashem’s hand is not always on His Throne [as the verse seems to mean]. Rather, His hand is momentarily raised toward it, similar to: “For I shall raise My hand to Heaven. . .” (Devarim 32:40). (See Kitzur Mizrachi.)

V. 16. ויאמר, er gab ihm diesen Namen und sprach damit aus, dass usw. oder: er sprach dies, weil usw. — כס kommt nicht wieder vor. Es ist offenbar das nicht vollendete כסא, so wie י׳ nur ein Teil des Gottesnamens ist. Es ist offenbar, wie die Weisen es ausgesprochen: לא השם שלם ולא הכסא שלם עד שיאבד זכרו של עמלק, so lange Amaleks Ruhmgedächtnis lebt, ist weder Gottes Thron noch sein Name vollständig. Nur in der Natur, aber nicht in der Menschenwelt herrscht Gott, nur höchstens über die Natur, aber nicht über die Menschenwelt wird Gottes Herrschaft anerkannt, so lange nicht die Menschentat sich Gott unterwirft, und so lange das Ideal der Menschengröße die Gewalt und nicht die Gott huldigende Vollbringung seines Sittengesetzes ist. Allein Mosche spricht es hier aus: Die auf Gottes Thron waltende Macht — so unausgebaut auch noch der Thron und so unvollständig auch noch erkannt sein Name — heißt nichts anderes, als: Krieg für Gott, d. h. für seine volle Anerkennung, wider Amalek von Geschlecht zu Geschlecht. Der Inbegriff der Gotteswaltung in der Geschichte ist nichts anderes, als Kampf wider Amalek bis ans Ziel der Zeiten.

ויאמר כי יד על כס י-ה, he (Moses) said: “as soon as G–d’s hand on His throne will become firmly established throughout His universe, He will go to war against Amalek. The word יד describing an active monarchy is found in Samuel I 15,12,. I have heard in the name of Rabbi Aaron Halevi of blessed memory who questioned that the subject of the word יד here is Amalek, seeing that it says: ”I will surely wipe out.” How could Amalek have said this of himself? On the other hand in Deuteronomy 25,19, Moses commands the people in the name of the Lord that once the time has come when there is no more antisemitism, instead of letting bygones be bygones, the Jewish people are charged with seeing to it that even the mention of the name Amalek will be eradicated once and for all. Personally, I do not see a problem there at all. In our portion we discuss times when Amalek raises its hand against Israel. At such a time we need G–d to defend us against him. In Deuteronomy, it is presumed Amalek is raising his sword against the Temple, G–d’s home on earth. When the residence of the Lord is in danger, it is G–d’s people, we, who have to rise up in its defense. Jerusalem is called the throne of G–d. His throne is not secure as long as there is still any descendant of Amalek alive on this earth. We read in Psalms 9,8: וה' לעולם ישב כונן למשפט כסאו, “but the Lord abides forever; He has set up His throne for judgment.” This is the reason why the dead are unable to praise the Lord (Psalms 115,17) seeing that being dead they cannot battle Amalek. This is why David continues in Psalm 118 with: לא אמות כי אחיה ואספר מעשי ה' וגו', “I do not wish to die, as I want to be able to tell of the great deeds of the Lord, etc.”

כי יד על כס יה, “for as long Israel will possess the power to appoint to sit on the throne of G-d;” we know of a similar though strangely sounding formulation, from Chronicles I 29,23: וישב שלמה על כסא ה' למלך תחת דוד אביר“Solomon successfully took over the throne of the Lord as king instead of his father David.” The verse describes conditions when it will be possible to wage G-d’s war against Amalek.

כי יד על כס יה BECAUSE THE HAND IS UPON THE THRONE OF JAH — the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, is raised to swear by His throne that He will have war and enmity against Amalek to all eternity. And what is the force of כס — why does it not say as usual כסא? And the Divine Name, also, is divided into half (יה is only the half of the Tetragrammaton)! The Holy One, blessed be He, swears that His Name will not be perfect nor His throne perfect until the name of Amalek be entirely blotted out. But when his name is blotted out then will His (God’s) Name be perfect and His throne perfect, as it is said, (Psalms 9:7) “The enemy is come to an end, he whose swords were for ever” — and this refers to Amalek of whom it is written, (Amos 1:11; the paragraph is a prophecy against Edom — Esau — the father of Amalek) “he kept his wrath for ever”. The verse in the Psalm continues: “and thou didst uproot enemies, their very memorial is perished”, What does it say immediately after this? (Psalms 9:8) “But the Lord (the Divine Name as given here is the Tetragrammaton) shall now remain for ever” — you see that the Name will be perfect (after Amalek is entirely rooted out as is mentioned in v. 7); “He establishes his throne (כסאו not כס) in righteousness” — so you see that His throne will then be perfect (Midrash Tanchuma, Ki Tisa 11).

יד, the word יד normally translated as “hand,” in this instance refers to power, Royal authority.” We know of a similar example for the meaning of that word from Samuel I 15,12, where the prophet Shmuel was advised of Shaul’s arriving at Mount Carmel, and he prepares for this by erecting a יד, for him, i.e. an altar. The words there are: והנה הוא מציב לו יד. In Samuel II 8,3 we also find the word יד used in this sense when David built an altar. [Not the traditional understanding of the word by most commentators. Ed.] The word כסא usually is used as a symbol of power, Royal Power.[If this is so, the word יד in the same line cannot mean the same, of course. Ed.] A different interpretation: the verse means that as long as nations, or especially Amalek, see in Jerusalem and what its stands for its spiritual nemesis, there will be an ongoing war between G-d and His representative on earth, Israel; מלחמה לה' בעמלק, “a state of war between G-d and Amalek; this phrase is what the liturgist has in mind when he wrote in his poetic prayer recited on the Sabbath preceding the reading of Parshat zachor on the Sabbath preceding Purim.־, commencing with the words: אלוקים אל דמי לך, “do not be silent o G-d”; the author queries G-d’s relative inactivity versus Amalek although He has dealt more harshly with other adversaries throughout history. [There are only few congregations in which this liturgical poem is recited nowadays in the synagogues. It is lengthy and the language requires assistance by commentaries as provided in the prayer book known as otzar hatefillot. Ed.] G-d’s answer is that until Amalek attacks G-d directly, not just His people, it is our task to deal with him, once he does the latter, G-d personally will wipe him out, This is why when Titus destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem G-d dealt with him, whereas at this stage it was our task to fight him. According to Jeremiah 3,17 Jerusalem is called G-d’s throne.