Commentaire sur L’Exode 2:16

ולכהן מדין THE PRIEST OF MIDIAN — כהן signifies the chief amongst them (see Targ. Onkelos and Mekhilta יתרו); he had abandoned the idol-worship to which they were addicted and they banished him, driving him away from them (Exodus Rabbah 1:32).

NOW THE PRIEST OF MIDIAN HAD SEVEN DAUGHTERS. Scripture does not mention him by name for he is not known [to the reader], but rather epithetically mentions that he was the honored one in his priesthood. This was Jethro, for after he became related to Moses it is written, And Moses went and returned to Jether his father-in-law,⁹³Further, 4:18. and there it is written, And Jethro said to Moses: Go in peace.⁹³Further, 4:18. [This proves that Jether and Jethro are the same person], just as Eliyah and Eliyahu,⁹⁴Eliyah (II Kings 1:3), Eliyahu (I Kings 17:1). Yirmiyah and Yirmiyahu.⁹⁵Yirmiyah (Jeremiah 27:1), Yirmiyahu (ibid., 1:1). After he became a proselyte to Judaism, he was called Hobab, as it is written, from the children of Hobab the father-in-law of Moses,⁹⁶Judges 4:11. for it is the way of all who become converts to Judaism that they be called another name in Israel. And he [Jethro or Hobab] was the son of Reuel, for it is written, And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Reuel the Midianite.⁹⁷Numbers 10:29. The verse here stating, And they came to Reuel their father,⁹⁸Verse 18. means “their father’s father,” just as [Jacob had said], O G-d of my father Abraham,⁹⁹Genesis 32:10. [and Abraham was his father’s father], and [when speaking of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, Scripture says], Nebuchadnezzar his father,¹⁰⁰Daniel 5:2. [while he was his father’s father].¹⁰¹Evil-merodach, king of Babylon, ruled after Nebuchadnezzar (see II Kings 25:27), and he was followed by Belshazzar (see Megillah 11a). Nebuchadnezzar was thus Belshazzar’s grandfather, and yet Scripture (Daniel 5:2) speaks of him as his father. Similarly: Know ye Laban the son of Nahor?¹⁰²Genesis 29:5. But Laban was really the son of Bethuel, for he was the brother of Rebekah (ibid., 24:29), and of Rebekah it is written that her father was Bethuel (ibid., Verse 15). Bethuel’s father was Nahor (ibid., 22:20-22). Yet Jacob asked, Know ye Laban the son of Nahor? It is because a grandfather is called “father.” And Mephibosheth the son of Saul.¹⁰³II Samuel 19:25. Mephibosheth was the son of Jonathan (ibid., 4:4), who was the son of Saul. There are many other such verses.
[Jethro’s daughters came and told Reuel their grandfather of how Moses came to their aid — as is related in Verses 18-19 — and did not tell Jethro] because the priest was not found in the house since he was preoccupied with the ministry in his temple, and so they came to the grandfather. It is possible that the verse, And Moses was content to dwell with the man,¹⁰⁴Verse 21. refers to the priest mentioned above [in Verse 16 — namely, Jethro]¹⁰⁵The intent of Ramban’s words is as follows: According to the above-mentioned interpretation that Jethro was not to be found in his home and that consequently his daughters told Reuel, his father, what had happened (as stated in Verses 18-20), it should follow that the expression, And Moses was content to dwell with ‘the man’ (Verse 21) refers to Reuel, and it was Reuel who gave Moses Zipporah his granddaughter as a wife. But, continues Ramban, it is possible that “the man” in Verse 21 refers back to “the priest” in Verse 16, and so it was Jethro who gave Moses his daughter in marriage. — for it was he who gave Moses Zipporah his daughter.

THE PRIEST OF MIDIAN ... TO R'U'EL, the father of THEIR FATHER (v. 18). If so, their father's name is Yitro, and Hovav, the son of R'u'el, who is mentioned below in Parashat B'ha'alot'cha (Num. 10:29) -- "Moses said to Hovav son of R'u'el" -- Hovav and Yitro are the same. And if R'u'el is Yitro, then he [Hovav] was Yitro's son. But what is written in the Prophets (Jud. 4:11) -- "descendants of Hovav, father-in-law of Moshe" -- proves that Hovav is Yitro, since all other mentions of "Moshe's father-in-law" mention Yitro.

He abandoned the worship of idols whereupon they (the Midianites) banished him. Rashi is answering the question: Since Yisro was the most prominent man of Midian, why did the shepherds chase away his sheep? Therefore Rashi explains: “He abandoned the worship of idols. . .” (Maharshal) Although Yisro abandoned the worship of idols, he did not convert fully. For later, upon hearing of the Splitting of the Sea, he came to convert. But I heard it means that Yisro abandoned the idols of Midian to worship other idols. This is in accordance with the Mechilta (Yisro 1): “There was no idol that Yisro had not worshipped.” Thus we must say that Yisro abandoned one idolatry for another. According to this, we can understand why Yisro stipulated with Moshe that Moshe’s first son shall be devoted to idolatry (ibid.), [although Yisro had already “abandoned” the worship of idols]. (Maharamash)

ולכהן מדין שבע בנות, “and the priest of Midian was father of seven daughters;” Yitro was the High Priest in Midian, and the Torah had to explain that the reason none of his sons was tending his livestock was the fact that he only had daughters. Another explanation: Yitro had dissociated himself from paganism, and after that no one was willing to tend his flocks after he had been officially ostracized by his townsfolk.

את הרהטים THE GUTTERS — the troughs for the currents of water which are excavated in the ground.

AND THEY CAME AND DREW WATER. Every day, the practice was that the shepherds drew water, filled the troughs and watered their flocks first, and then these women watered their flocks. It happened that on this day, the women preceded the men and they came and drew water, thinking to water their flocks before the shepherds came. But then came the shepherds and drove them away¹⁰⁶Verse 17. from the troughs, insisting on watering their own flocks first as they had always done. Moses’ anger was aroused because of this injustice, and he saved them, for since they had filled the troughs, the water belonged to them. Moreover, he drew water for them¹⁰⁷Verse 19. as the troughs did not suffice for all their flocks. This is the purport of the question, How is it that ye are come so soon today?¹⁰⁸Verse 18. [which Reuel their grandfather asked them]. And they answered, An Egyptian delivered us out of the hand of the shepherds,¹⁰⁷Verse 19. meaning that “they had always driven us away when we came to the troughs first.”