Commentaire de citation sur Les Psaumes 91:11

כִּ֣י מַ֭לְאָכָיו יְצַוֶּה־לָּ֑ךְ לִ֝שְׁמָרְךָ֗ בְּכָל־דְּרָכֶֽיךָ׃

car à ses anges il a donné mission de te protéger en toutes tes voies.

Rabbeinu Bahya

ויפגעו בו מלאכי אלוקים, “and angels of G’d met him.” These were the same angels who had been mentioned at the beginning of the portion who had been ascending and descending the ladder Yaakov had seen in his dream. This is what the Torah added כאשר ראם, “as he had seen them.” In other words, he was already familiar with these angels. We have a similar construction in Ezekiel 10,20 היא החיה אשר ראיתי , “this is the angel whom I had seen, etc.” Actually, the Torah could have written ויפגע במלאכי אלוקים, “he encountered angels of G’d.” The reason the Torah wrote that the angels met Yaakov instead of vice versa is a compliment to Yaakov. The purpose of the encounter was in order to protect Yaakov. It is similar to Psalms 91,15 כי מלאכיו יצוה לך לשמרך בכל דרכיך, “for He will command His angels to guard you (the righteous) on all your paths.”
There is a discussion in the Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 78,2 as to who is greater, the guardian or the person whom he guards? The Midrash concludes that the person being guarded is greater than the guardian. The Midrash came to this conclusion based on the verse (Psalms 91,12) “to guard you on all your paths to carry you in their hands lest you hurt your foot on a stone.” The Midrash also asks: “who is greater the carrier or the one being carried?” It concludes that the person being carried is the more important of the two. Finally, the Midrash asks: “who is more important the one being met or the one who goes out to meet someone?” The Midrash concludes that the person being met is the more important of the two. We find some support for this in connection with the prophet Elisha. We read in Kings II 6,15: “when the attendant of the man of G’d rose early and went outside, he saw a force, with horses and chariots, surrounding the town and he said to his master: ‘what shall we do?’” The verse goes on to say: “do not be afraid there are more on our side than on theirs.” A little later the verse continues: “G’d opened the eyes of the servant and he saw and here the mountain all around Elisha was covered with horses and chariots of fire.” [The paragraph started with the one who meets, only to conclude with the ones being met, the latter becoming the victors in the ensuing battle. Ed.]

Marbeh Lesaper

MagThe sixteen drops of wine represent the plagues, themselves: this is ‘revealed’ meaning of this practice.202Niglah, revealed, as opposed to the nistar, hidden, mystical meaning of this practice. There is a connection of three the plagues: lice (kinim), boils (sh’chin) and darkness (choshekh). The letters that make up the names of these three plagues are interchangeable so that if you write one on top of the other you will see that they spell out each other’s names in different directions.en Avraham199Abraham Abele Gombiner (c. 1633 – c. 1683), known as the Magen Avraham, born in Gąbin, Poland, was a rabbi, Talmudist and a leading religious authority in the Jewish community of Kalish, Poland during the seventeenth century. quotes Darchei Moshe200Rav Moshe Isserles was born in 1530; he served as the Rosh Yeshiva of Cracow. His most famous work is the Mapah, a commentary on the Shulchan Aruch, and he also authored the Darchei Moshe, a commentary on the Beit Yoseif of Rav Yoseif Karo. He is the main halachic authority for Ashkenazic Jewry. He passed away in 1572. regarding the proper method of pouring a bit of wine from the cup when we mention the ten plagues. He claims that it is customary to pour or to sprinkle 16 drops of wine from one’s wine cup at this point: three for “Blood, fire and pillars of smoke;” ten for the plagues; and three for D’ztakh Adash Ba’achav. These 16 drops are for the Holy One’s sword which is called Yohakh (Yud Hei Vav Kaf).201The words Yohakh contain the final letters of the four Hebrew words which say, Ki malakhav yitzaveh lakh, “He will order His angels (to guard you wherever you go.)” – Psalm 91:11 Yo – God- hakh – strikes. The truly pious do not dip their fingers into the cup when they remove wine from their cup; instead they pour a bit directly from the cup.

ח ש כ
ש ח נ
כ נ ם
This suggests that these three plagues are connected to one another; each plague contains a manifestation of the other two plagues. Each plague represents three plagues – instead of three plagues, they would then be nine plagues. Along with the other seven plagues that would make sixteen plagues! This would also explain, why, when it came to the third plague, the magicians of Egypt were unable to perform the plague like Moses, and they declared, “It is the finger of God!” The magicians of Egypt were able to perform one magical act at a time; they were not able to recreate two or three plagues at the same time. It was then that they realized that Moses was not performing miracles. Rather he was acting with the help of God.
Why did the Egyptian magicians say, “It is the finger of God,”203Exodus 8:15 during the third plague? According to a Midrash204Yalkut Shimoni, Parshat Vaera there were fourteen types of vermin in Egypt during the third plague – the smallest of which was the size of an egg. The Egyptians could not replicate this plague because they could not perform so many acts at the same time. That is how the magicians knew that it was the ‘finger of God,’ and not an act of magic.
But there is problem with the claim that darkness, lice and boils are interconnected. We learn elsewhere that blood, frogs and lice were performed by Aaron; wild animals, pestilence and the death of the first born by God; hail, locust and darkness by Moses. Boils was performed by all three of them together.205Shemot Rabbah 12:4 If this is so, then lice and darkness should also have been performed by (all three) Moses, Aaron and God, since boils was part of lice and darkness. It therefore stands to reason that the plague of boils must have been performed by God as well.
Earlier, we saw that there is an issue with including the death of the first born along with the last grouping of three plagues in d’tzakh, a”dash and ba’achav. In each of these groupings of plagues, the third (lice), sixth (boils) and ninth (darkness) struck without warning; in the case of the tenth plague there was a warning. We have answered this question by pointing out that though Pharaoh was warned of the tenth plague, he was not warned of the attack of the first born against Egypt. The final plague was against the first born as well as all those who were killed by them. Also, just as there were two aspects to the plague of the first born, so there were multiple aspects to the plagues of lice, boils and darkness, as we have seen above. (We do not count the attack of the tenth plague as two separate plagues since both involved the first born.)
Hidden in the abbreviations D’tzakh, a”dash and ba’achav is the entire story of Israel’s redemption from Egypt: When combined, the final letters of these three abbreviations spell kesev (lamb). The first letters of the abbreviations spell eved (slave). And the middle letters spell tzei chad (in one go out). Hidden in the abbreviation, then, we learn that the people of Israel would have been slaves forever had they waited one more second in Egypt. They would have descended below the forty-ninth level of impurity; ‘they went out because of one more second.’ It was because of the merit of a lamb (that is, the Passover sacrifice) which they offered that they were worthy of being redeemed from Egypt. The letters kesev also spell kavash – because the Israelites sacrificed the lamb in Egypt, they vanquished the angelic prince of Egypt and could be redeemed. This is why the verse in Psalms says, “He struck Egypt through their first born,”206Psalms 136:10 and not “He struck the first born of Egypt.” By striking down the prince of Egypt who is called the first born of Egypt, God redeemed the people of Israel. In exchange for this God said, “Sanctify for me your first born.”207Exodus 13:2
This also explains the law of Passover: unlike the regular dietary laws, even a bit of leavening renders food chametz. 208There is a concept in the laws of Kashrut of batel b’shishim, if the amount of non kosher food or dairy that falls into a meat mixture is one sixtieth, it does not make the whole unkosher. Just as the words, chametz and matzah209The words chametz and matzah are almost the same – the letters, hay and chet which are very similar to one another and are distinguished by a tiny line. ח ה are only distinguished by a tiny bit, so even another second in Egypt would have rendered Israel unredeemable. All of this is hinted at in Rabbi Yehudah’s abbreviation.210Rabbi Isaiah Horowitz, Shnei Luchot Haberit, Masechet Pesachim
There is another aspect to the final plague that makes it similar to the third, sixth and ninth plague. This plague struck not only the people of Egypt but the first born Egyptians who were born outside of Egypt or who were living in other lands. Like the final plagues in the other groupings, they were struck without warning. In this matter, Rabbi Yehudah disagrees with the previous statement in the Haggadah, which says, “These are the ten plagues which the Holy one brought upon the Egyptians in Egypt…” This statement implies that the plagues only struck those Egyptians in the land of Egypt while Rabbi Yehudah was of the opinion that the plagues struck Egyptians no matter where they lived.

Da'at Zekenim

ידינו לא שפכה, “our hands have not spilled this blood;” it is peculiar that the last letter in the word ושפכה is the letter ה when we would have expected it to be the plural ending ו. [It is read as if it had been spelled with the letter ו. Ed.] Our sages drive from this spelling that there are five items=ה, that must be provided by a host worthy of that name. They are: food, drink, overnight lodging, accompanying the guest at his departure for a certain distance, and providing him with some food for the journey. (Talmud Sotah, folio 45) The Talmud raises the question of how could anyone have thought that the members of the elders of the town near which the body had been found could have been responsible for the death of the person described in our paragraph? Why would they have to publicly declare their innocence? What these Elders really declared was that they had never been remiss in providing the five items mentioned in the Talmud to anyone who had been their guest. In other words, if that person had been a guest in their houses, they could state categorically, that he would have been treated in the manner that is appropriate. We have a saying by Rav Yehudah who quoted in the name of Rav, that anyone who has enjoyed as little as even four cubits of accompaniment from his host on his way out will not come to harm on the journey on which he set out. This saying has been illustrated by an actual occurrence. The scholar Ravinah accompanied Rava bar Yitzchok, when he became involved in a dangerous, potentially fatal situation, and he was saved from it (Talmud, Sotah folio 46) The Talmud sets the distances that a guest has to be accompanied by the host on his departure, commencing with a relatively short distance when a teacher had hosted a student, and a much greater distance when the student had hosted a teacher. (1200 meters in the latter case) Rabbi Meir considers the subject of such accompaniment one that the host can be enforced by a court to observe. [Naturally, the assumption is that the host is able-bodied. Ed.] According to Judges 1,24 there is no fixed limit for this, and the Israelites who had been in the process of conquering parts of the Holy Land that had not yet been conquered while Joshua had been alive showed a Canaanite gratitude for his showing them the way, similar to the spies promising Rahav of Jericho complete protection including her family for having protected them while on their mission. [The prophet explains how many parts of the land of Canaan remained unconquered on account of this for hundreds of years. Ed.] [If I understand correctly, when gentiles, even those under decree of death by the Torah unless they left the land, saved Israelites, our gratitude takes tangible form. In the example quoted from the Book of Judges, the Canaanite had not even personally accompanied the Israelites in question but had merely showed them the way. Ed.] In verse 26 of the incident quoted, the person whom they saved went forth to another part of the land of the Canaanites and successfully built a new city which he named Luz, [the name of Beyt El, before Yaakov had renamed it in Genesis 28,19. [Yaakov had been totally exposed there and had been saved miraculously. Ed.]. According to Rabbi Yoshua, Mitzrayim, (Pharaoh, in Genesis chapter 12,20, who gave Avraham a military escort to protect him, since he had become so wealthy) who accompanied Avraham for a distance of only 4 cubits beyond the border was rewarded, so that the Israelites had to wait four hundred years before being redeemed from Egypt. (Compare Talmud, tractate Sotah, folio 46) According to another view in the Talmud, when mention is made of לוויה, escorting someone, without any further detail, the distance meant is approx 1,2 km. This is also supposed to be the meaning of Psalms 91,11: כי מלאכיו יצוה לך לשמרך בכל דרכיך, “for He will order His angels to protect you wherever you go.” The distance of 1,2 k.m. equal to the Hebrew word מיל, is based on the first letters in the three words מלאכיו יצוה לך. When enjoying this level of escort one is certain to be successful in all one’s undertakings. Nonetheless the sages said that giving a departing guest money without also giving him some bread, is not sufficient. They base themselves on Proverbs 28,21: ועל פת לחם יפשע גבר, “sin sometimes originates from the lack of a piece of bread.” Solomon means that having not ensured that a departing guest has access to some food immediately, may become the cause of his suffering from an attack of בולמוס, “ravenous hunger,” which if not dealt with immediately may result in the death of the afflicted person. Rabbi Yochanan went as far as to say that anyone who fails to escort a departing guest is guilty of bloodshed. He based himself on the fact that if the people of Jericho had escorted the prophet out of their city and provided him with basic necessities, he would not have caused the bears to kill 42 young people of that town. (Kings II 2,23) Rabbi Elazar in dealing with that incident, claims that the word ונערים in that verse should not be understood as teenagers, but as מן עורים persons who abstain from performing G–d’s commandments, and the word קטנים which follows, means as being “small” in that they had little faith in G–d. Elisha was supposed to have seen through prophetic insight that the mothers of all of these youngsters who had made fun of him had all become pregnant with them on Yom Kippur, on a day when having marital relations is strictly prohibited. This is why he felt free to curse them in the name of the Lord, as described there. Furthermore, the subject of escorting departing guests is of greater significance than handing out a gift. Handing out gifts is not something involving one’s body, whereas escorting a departing guest involves a physical effort, showing that one is personally involved. In fact the performance of this commandment is of such significance that the benefits promised for the recipient are also applied to the host who performs this act, who will be protected until he comes home again. This is based on Isaiah 57,19: שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב, “welcome, welcome both to the one as yet distant and to the one already closer to us.” The one described as “distant,” is the departing guest, and the one described as “near” is the host, who is on his way home. [Our author concludes with one or two additional blessings that is in store for people performing this commandment, which I have decided not to bother with. Ed.]