Commentaire de citation sur L’Exode 8:8

which he sang unto the Lord concerning Cush, a Benjamite: – Our teachers of blessed memory have said (Targum ad loc. and Babli, Moed Katon 16 b, with some variation) that this Psalm was uttered concerning Saul. And he calls him Cush because he was beautiful, as “the Cushite woman” (Num. 12:1), which is interpreted in the Targum as “the beautiful woman”; and such is the opinion of all the exegetes. And they say that he calls him “Cushite” as a Cushite is one who does not change his skin, so Saul did not change in his hatred towards David. And in this way it is said (Jer. 13:23), “Can the Cushite change his skin or the leopard his spots? Then may ye also be able to do good who are accustomed to do evil.” And the learned R. Abraham ben Ezra, of blessed memory, rejected this interpretation; for he asks, How should anyone say of the Lord's anointed, Behold, he travaileth with iniquity (5:15)? And he says there was one of the children of Benjamin who hated him, and his name was Cush. And his objection to Behold, he travaileth with iniquity as being said of Saul does not hold. Why should he not say so? Behold, did (not) David say to his very face: “Out of the wicked proceedeth wickedness” (1 Sam. 24:14)? And did he (not) say to him: “And the Lord avenge thee of me” (ibid. 24:13)? And in the Haggadic exposition (Shoher Tob, ad loc.) (it says that) he surnames him Cush, because it is written (Koheleth 10:20): “Curse not the king, no, not in thy thought.” x And the Haggadic interpretation is correct. You see that all agree that the Psalm was spoken of Saul, apart from the (one) interpreter mentioned. And as regards the expression concerning (על דברי, lit. “concerning the matters of”), (it is used) because the matters and affairs which he had in connexion with him were numerous. Many times also he had purposed to slay him, as it is written (in Scripture). The first occasion, when he became his son-in-law, he purposed to make him fall into the hand of the Philistines; afterwards he purposed to slay him in his house; and when he stood (ministering) before him he hurled the javelin at him many times; and (even) after he had parted from him (he acted) in a like manner also when he was pursuing him. And the interpretation of דברי על is “concerning the matter of” in accordance with (the use of the expression in such a passage as): “concerning (דבר על) the frogs” (Exod. 8:8), and similar passages.

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

Tzfardeah - Frogs: Tz’fardeah, frogs, is written in the singular while kinim, lice, is written in the plural because there was one giant frog that attacked Egypt; when the Egyptians struck it, it broke up into many small frogs. A simpler explanation is that the word tzfardeah, though written in the singular, it refers to many frogs. We find this disagreement between Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Akiva.²¹⁷Exodus Rabbah 10:4 It is also possible that kinim, lice is written in the plural because it refers to many different species of lice but there was only one type of frog that attacked Egypt so it is written in the singular. The Midrash says much more about this plague. We learn that frogs were the most deadly plague since they found their way into the Egyptians beds, attacked them, and mocked the them by saying their gods were destroyed!²¹⁸Ha, Ha! Not only giant but talking frogs! This explanation, though fanciful, is based on statements in the Torah and a passage interpreting them in Exodus Rabbah, 15:27. See Exodus 8:8. The plague of frogs - the word, d’var, ‘plague’ can also mean ‘word.’ And Genesis 38:9 The Torah says, “The frogs shall come among you and your people;”²¹⁹Exodus &:29 literally this verse says, “in you and your people.” Rabbi Aha explained that Pharaoh drank a bit of water – it entered his heart and became a frog and burst forth there. Rabbi Yohanan said that where there was dust and water, it turned into a frog.²²⁰Exodus Rabbah 10:3 There are many other explanations as well.