וַיִגְדַּ֣ל הַיֶּ֗לֶד וַתְּבִאֵ֙הוּ֙ לְבַת־פַּרְעֹ֔ה וַֽיְהִי־לָ֖הּ לְבֵ֑ן וַתִּקְרָ֤א שְׁמוֹ֙ מֹשֶׁ֔ה וַתֹּ֕אמֶר כִּ֥י מִן־הַמַּ֖יִם מְשִׁיתִֽהוּ׃
L’enfant devenu grand, elle le remit à la fille de Pharaon et il devint son fils; elle lui donna le nom de Moïse, disant: "Parce que je l’ai retiré des eaux."
Rabbeinu Bahya
A Midrashic approach (Tanchuma Tazria 9): Why has this paragraph not been introduced by the customary: “speak to the Children of Israel; if a person has such and such symptoms, etc.?” The absence of this introductory formula is to teach you that it is not the Lord who initiates afflictions as we know from Psalms 5,5 כי לא אל חפץ רשע אתה לא יגורך רע, ”for You are not a G’d who desires wickedness, evil cannot abide with You;” David does not belabour the obvious; he speaks about G’d having no desire to make any creature guilty of anything. We have proof of this also in Ezekiel 33,11: “as true as I am alive, says the Lord, G’d, I do not desire the death of the wicked.” On the contrary, what is it that G’d desires? He wants to find an excuse to justify His creatures’ actions as we know from Isaiah 42,21: ה’ חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה ויאדיר, ”The Lord desires His creatures’ vindication, that He may magnify and glorify (His) Teaching.” If our paragraph had commenced in the normal way some people might have misunderstood and thought that G’d derives satisfaction from having to afflict people even though they were guilty of something.
Another comment by the Midrash: the words “evil does not abide with You” which we quoted from Psalms 5,5 mean that the name of G’d is not associated with events of an evil nature but only with things positive. When G’d created light and darkness, He did associate His name with the light but not with the darkness. In Genesis 1,5 the Torah writes: “G’d called the light day, and the darkness He called night.” When G’d blessed the first pair of human beings, His name was associated with the blessing for both of them, as the Torah writes (Genesis 1,28: “G’d blessed them.” On the other hand, when G’d decreed a curse on man, (Genesis 3,16) The Torah writes: “to the woman He had said, etc.,” and we find similar language in connection with the penalty decreed on Adam. The Torah writes (Genesis 3,17): “and to Adam He had said, etc.” You may ask that when G’d cursed the serpent we also find this kind of language, i.e. (Genesis 3,14) “the Lord G’d had said to the serpent, ‘because you have done this, etc.’” Our sages answered this query in Tanchuma Tazria 9 by saying that there are indeed three occasions when G’d did associate His name with something evil, such as a curse. The first instance is the case of the מסית, someone who seduces others to worship idols; the first personification of such a seducer was the serpent who seduced Chavah in Gan Eden saying to her: “G’d knows that on the day you (pl) will eat from the tree your eyes will be opened and you will become just like G’d” (Genesis 3,5). The serpent implied that just as G’d had created worlds so she and Adam would be able to create worlds; the serpent implied that G’d had forbidden eating the fruit because He was jealous of potential competition. The serpent implied that just as a skilled craftsman is anxious not to reveal the secrets of his craft, so G’d wanted to keep the secret of how He had created the universe. Seeing that the serpent had used G’d’s name in its seduction of Chavah, G’d in turn associated His name with the punishment, the curse.
The second instance of G’d’s name being associated with something evil concerns people who deliberately transgress the decrees of the sages whose authority has been given to them by G’d and has been confirmed at Mount Gerizim. The prophet Jeremiah referred to the fact that such people are guilty of death when he wrote in Jeremiah 11,3: “Thus said the Lord: cursed be the man who will not obey the terms of this covenant which I enjoined your fathers when I freed them from Egypt, etc.” The sin of these people is that they place their trust in man instead of in G’d as the prophet said in Jeremiah 17,5: “Thus said the Lord: ‘cursed is he who trusts in man, who makes a mere flesh his strength and turns his thoughts from the Lord.’” In other words, when does the curse mentioned earlier apply? When someone turns his heart away from the Lord. When Noach blessed his sons Shem and Yaphet, he used the name of G’d in his blessing, saying: ברוך ה’ אלו-הי שם, “blessed be the Lord, the G’d of Shem,” etc. When he cursed Canaan (Genesis 9,26) he simply said: ארור כנען, “cursed be Canaan;” he did not mention G’d in that context. When the prophet Elisha prayed to G’d asking for deliverance from the Arameans (enemy of the Israelites at that time, Kings II 6,17) he invoked the name of the Lord in his prayer saying: “Lord open his eyes let him see” (a reference to his attendant who was afraid). When he then turned to cursing the Arameans (verse 18 of the same chapter), Elisha only said: ”please strike these people with a blinding light.” The name of G’d was not invoked in the prayer to bring a curse upon them. Even when the Israelites were sinful, G’d referred to them with respect and honor. When G’d legislated the kind of animals which were to be offered by the Israelites, -when, where and under what circumstances,- the legislation is introduced with the words: “if one of you wishes to offer a sacrifice to the Lord, etc.” When introducing the צרעת legislation, however, the name of G’d does not appear. Clearly, even when the legislation presupposes sins by the afflicted, the Torah still does not wish to involve G’d directly, as the One who initiates the “curse.” This is why the verse starts merely with the words: “when someone develops a white spot on the skin of his flesh, etc.”
What sins cause such afflictions? In retribution for illicit sex. (Tanchuma Tazria 11) This is also what happened in Jerusalem whose inhabitants were struck by this disease because their sexual mores had deteriorated so much (Isaiah 3,16) ”because the daughters of Zion are so vain and walk with their heads thrown back, with roving eyes, and with mincing gait, making a tingling with their feet...the Lord will uncover their heads.” The word used there is שפח which is the equivalent of צרעת as we know from Leviticus 14,5.
The words אדם כי יהיה בעור בשרו שאת או ספחת, are equivalent to what we read n Chabakuk 1,7 איום ונורא ממננו ושפתו ושאתו יצא, “they are terrible and dreadful; they make their own laws and are overbearing.” The prophet speaks about Adam who was the direct creation of G’d, created in His likeness, who was composed of particles from all the corners of the globe and whose dominion before his sin therefore extended over all parts of the globe. At that time Adam was able to see with his eyes from one end of the earth to the other. Adam’s wife, Chavah was created from his very body, she who caused his mortality. Seeing that she gave Adam to eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge she made him mortal.
Another Midrashic explanation: The words “terrible and dreadful” which we quoted from Chabakuk refer to Pharaoh who ruled over the whole earth as we know from Psalms 105,20. The words: “they make their own laws, etc.” refer to Moses who grew up in the very house of this wicked Pharaoh and eventually deprived him of his rule after bringing ten plagues upon him. Moses used to take a look at his holy staff to see which kind of plague was appropriate to smite Pharaoh with; he would then inflict this plague upon him; hence the prophet speaks about something “terrible and dreadful.”
Yet another interpretation of that verse in Chabakuk relates the adjectives in that verse to the principal characteristics of the four host nations who had control of the Jewish people in exile at different times. [The Midrash broadens its perspective of allegorical meanings; the interested reader is referred to the original text seeing that our author does not contribute to the understanding of this Midrash except quoting its text. Ed.]
Another comment by the Midrash: the words “evil does not abide with You” which we quoted from Psalms 5,5 mean that the name of G’d is not associated with events of an evil nature but only with things positive. When G’d created light and darkness, He did associate His name with the light but not with the darkness. In Genesis 1,5 the Torah writes: “G’d called the light day, and the darkness He called night.” When G’d blessed the first pair of human beings, His name was associated with the blessing for both of them, as the Torah writes (Genesis 1,28: “G’d blessed them.” On the other hand, when G’d decreed a curse on man, (Genesis 3,16) The Torah writes: “to the woman He had said, etc.,” and we find similar language in connection with the penalty decreed on Adam. The Torah writes (Genesis 3,17): “and to Adam He had said, etc.” You may ask that when G’d cursed the serpent we also find this kind of language, i.e. (Genesis 3,14) “the Lord G’d had said to the serpent, ‘because you have done this, etc.’” Our sages answered this query in Tanchuma Tazria 9 by saying that there are indeed three occasions when G’d did associate His name with something evil, such as a curse. The first instance is the case of the מסית, someone who seduces others to worship idols; the first personification of such a seducer was the serpent who seduced Chavah in Gan Eden saying to her: “G’d knows that on the day you (pl) will eat from the tree your eyes will be opened and you will become just like G’d” (Genesis 3,5). The serpent implied that just as G’d had created worlds so she and Adam would be able to create worlds; the serpent implied that G’d had forbidden eating the fruit because He was jealous of potential competition. The serpent implied that just as a skilled craftsman is anxious not to reveal the secrets of his craft, so G’d wanted to keep the secret of how He had created the universe. Seeing that the serpent had used G’d’s name in its seduction of Chavah, G’d in turn associated His name with the punishment, the curse.
The second instance of G’d’s name being associated with something evil concerns people who deliberately transgress the decrees of the sages whose authority has been given to them by G’d and has been confirmed at Mount Gerizim. The prophet Jeremiah referred to the fact that such people are guilty of death when he wrote in Jeremiah 11,3: “Thus said the Lord: cursed be the man who will not obey the terms of this covenant which I enjoined your fathers when I freed them from Egypt, etc.” The sin of these people is that they place their trust in man instead of in G’d as the prophet said in Jeremiah 17,5: “Thus said the Lord: ‘cursed is he who trusts in man, who makes a mere flesh his strength and turns his thoughts from the Lord.’” In other words, when does the curse mentioned earlier apply? When someone turns his heart away from the Lord. When Noach blessed his sons Shem and Yaphet, he used the name of G’d in his blessing, saying: ברוך ה’ אלו-הי שם, “blessed be the Lord, the G’d of Shem,” etc. When he cursed Canaan (Genesis 9,26) he simply said: ארור כנען, “cursed be Canaan;” he did not mention G’d in that context. When the prophet Elisha prayed to G’d asking for deliverance from the Arameans (enemy of the Israelites at that time, Kings II 6,17) he invoked the name of the Lord in his prayer saying: “Lord open his eyes let him see” (a reference to his attendant who was afraid). When he then turned to cursing the Arameans (verse 18 of the same chapter), Elisha only said: ”please strike these people with a blinding light.” The name of G’d was not invoked in the prayer to bring a curse upon them. Even when the Israelites were sinful, G’d referred to them with respect and honor. When G’d legislated the kind of animals which were to be offered by the Israelites, -when, where and under what circumstances,- the legislation is introduced with the words: “if one of you wishes to offer a sacrifice to the Lord, etc.” When introducing the צרעת legislation, however, the name of G’d does not appear. Clearly, even when the legislation presupposes sins by the afflicted, the Torah still does not wish to involve G’d directly, as the One who initiates the “curse.” This is why the verse starts merely with the words: “when someone develops a white spot on the skin of his flesh, etc.”
What sins cause such afflictions? In retribution for illicit sex. (Tanchuma Tazria 11) This is also what happened in Jerusalem whose inhabitants were struck by this disease because their sexual mores had deteriorated so much (Isaiah 3,16) ”because the daughters of Zion are so vain and walk with their heads thrown back, with roving eyes, and with mincing gait, making a tingling with their feet...the Lord will uncover their heads.” The word used there is שפח which is the equivalent of צרעת as we know from Leviticus 14,5.
The words אדם כי יהיה בעור בשרו שאת או ספחת, are equivalent to what we read n Chabakuk 1,7 איום ונורא ממננו ושפתו ושאתו יצא, “they are terrible and dreadful; they make their own laws and are overbearing.” The prophet speaks about Adam who was the direct creation of G’d, created in His likeness, who was composed of particles from all the corners of the globe and whose dominion before his sin therefore extended over all parts of the globe. At that time Adam was able to see with his eyes from one end of the earth to the other. Adam’s wife, Chavah was created from his very body, she who caused his mortality. Seeing that she gave Adam to eat from the fruit of the tree of knowledge she made him mortal.
Another Midrashic explanation: The words “terrible and dreadful” which we quoted from Chabakuk refer to Pharaoh who ruled over the whole earth as we know from Psalms 105,20. The words: “they make their own laws, etc.” refer to Moses who grew up in the very house of this wicked Pharaoh and eventually deprived him of his rule after bringing ten plagues upon him. Moses used to take a look at his holy staff to see which kind of plague was appropriate to smite Pharaoh with; he would then inflict this plague upon him; hence the prophet speaks about something “terrible and dreadful.”
Yet another interpretation of that verse in Chabakuk relates the adjectives in that verse to the principal characteristics of the four host nations who had control of the Jewish people in exile at different times. [The Midrash broadens its perspective of allegorical meanings; the interested reader is referred to the original text seeing that our author does not contribute to the understanding of this Midrash except quoting its text. Ed.]
Tevele Bondi
Kiddush is the first of the four cups of wine. The reason for the four cups of wine:
1. The four cups are for the four decrees, which Pharaoh made against the people of Israel.
2. The four promises of redemption in Exodus chapter 6:6-8.
3. There is a passage in Midrash Rabbah 26:1 that relates the four cups to the following verse: "I had no repose, no quiet, no rest and trouble came." (Job 3:26) "I had no repose," refers to Pharaoh's first decree, about which it says, "They embittered their lives." (Ex. 1:14) In response to Pharaoh's first decree, God appointed a redeemer - Miriam. She was named thus because of the bitterness which the Egyptians caused. "I had no quiet," refers to Pharaoh's second decree, "If it is a baby boy you shall kill him." (Ex. 1:16) God appointed a second redeemer - Aaron. He was thus named because he saved the women in pregnancy (herayon - similar to his name, Aharon). "I did not rest," is a reference to the third decree of Pharaoh: "Every baby boy who is born shall be cast into the river." (Ex. 1:22). God appointed third redeemer - Moses, who was thus named, "From the water I drew him out." (Ex. 2:10). "And trouble came," this refers to Amalek of whom it is say, And Amalek came…And Joshua overwhelmed the people of Amalek with the sword." (Ex. 17:8, 13)
Let me explain: The first two explanations are common reasons given for the four cups of wine: Pharaoh's four decrees and the four promises of redemption: "I will free you, I will deliver you, I will redeem you, and I will take you out." The third explanation is unique. The Midrash, based on Job 3, relates the four decrees against Israel to the four parts of the verse from Job. However, for each evil decree there was a redeemer. The four cups, then, were for the four redeemers who took Israel out of the land of Egypt and brought them to the promised land. The Midrash does not make a connection between the cups of wine and the four redeemers but Rabbi Bondi makes the connection by quoting this passage from Midrash Rabbah.
1. The four cups are for the four decrees, which Pharaoh made against the people of Israel.
2. The four promises of redemption in Exodus chapter 6:6-8.
3. There is a passage in Midrash Rabbah 26:1 that relates the four cups to the following verse: "I had no repose, no quiet, no rest and trouble came." (Job 3:26) "I had no repose," refers to Pharaoh's first decree, about which it says, "They embittered their lives." (Ex. 1:14) In response to Pharaoh's first decree, God appointed a redeemer - Miriam. She was named thus because of the bitterness which the Egyptians caused. "I had no quiet," refers to Pharaoh's second decree, "If it is a baby boy you shall kill him." (Ex. 1:16) God appointed a second redeemer - Aaron. He was thus named because he saved the women in pregnancy (herayon - similar to his name, Aharon). "I did not rest," is a reference to the third decree of Pharaoh: "Every baby boy who is born shall be cast into the river." (Ex. 1:22). God appointed third redeemer - Moses, who was thus named, "From the water I drew him out." (Ex. 2:10). "And trouble came," this refers to Amalek of whom it is say, And Amalek came…And Joshua overwhelmed the people of Amalek with the sword." (Ex. 17:8, 13)
Let me explain: The first two explanations are common reasons given for the four cups of wine: Pharaoh's four decrees and the four promises of redemption: "I will free you, I will deliver you, I will redeem you, and I will take you out." The third explanation is unique. The Midrash, based on Job 3, relates the four decrees against Israel to the four parts of the verse from Job. However, for each evil decree there was a redeemer. The four cups, then, were for the four redeemers who took Israel out of the land of Egypt and brought them to the promised land. The Midrash does not make a connection between the cups of wine and the four redeemers but Rabbi Bondi makes the connection by quoting this passage from Midrash Rabbah.
Redeeming Relevance; Exodus
Looking at Moshe’s early life, we find a fascinating paradox: The greatest Jew to walk the face of the earth spent his childhood and youth in a completely non-Jewish culture. This forges the great irony that, as opposed to all the other Jews whom the Midrash praises for preserving their Jewish identities through keeping their Israelite names, language and dress (Vayikra Rabba 32:5),62Vayikra Rabba 32:5. Though the extant versions of this midrash do not include clothing, various early commentators mention it, suggesting the existence of such a version. young Moshe’s name,63See Ibn Ezra, R. Shmuel David Luzzatto, Malbim and R. Aryeh Kaplan (Shemot 2:10) on this point. language and certainly mode of dress were all Egyptian.
Redeeming Relevance; Exodus
Disponible uniquement pour les membres PremiumRashi
ויגדל משה AND MOSES WAS GROWN — But has it not already been written, (Exodus 2:10) “And the child grew”? Rabbi Judah the son of Eloai said: the first time it refers to growth in stature, the second time to greatness, — that Pharaoh appointed him to have charge over his palace (Tanchuma Yashan 2.2:17; cf. also Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 166:11).
Rashi
He drew me out Heb. ימשני, an expression of drawing out, as (in Exod. 2:10), “I drew him out (משיתהו) of the water.”