출애굽기 3:18의 주석

ושמעו לקלך AND THEY SHALL HEARKEN TO THY VOICE — as soon as you will mention to them this expression (the double use of the verb פקד as in v. 16) they will hearken to your voice, for they have long had this sign as a tradition from Jacob and Joseph that by mention of this phrase their deliverance will be brought about. Jacob said to them “And God will surely visit you”, and Joseph said to them (Genesis 50:25) “God will surely visit you”.

AND THEY SHALL HEARKEN TO THY VOICE. “I.e., of their own accord. As soon as you will mention to them this expression, [namely, the double use of the word pakod — pakod pakad’ti (I have surely remembered), mentioned in Verse 16], they will immediately hearken to your voice for they have long had this sign as a tradition from Jacob and Joseph, that by use of this expression they will be delivered [from Egypt]. Jacob said to them, and G-d will surely remember you,²³³See Genesis 50:24, that it is Joseph who is speaking. But it is clearly implied there that Joseph is quoting a tradition given to him by his father. Hence Rashi here mentions it in the name of Jacob. Ramban will further stress the fact that it was Joseph who stated it twice. and Joseph said to them, G-d will surely remember you.”²³⁴Ibid., Verse 25. Thus the language of Rashi. Perhaps Rashi will explain that Joseph used this expression twice²³⁵See Note 233 above. in order to affirm that it was a tradition he received from his father.
And in Eileh Shemoth Rabbah, the Rabbis said:²³⁶Shemoth Rabbah 3:11. “[As soon as you will say to them pakod pakad’ti], they will immediately hearken to your voice. Why? It is because they have a tradition of the words [wherein G-d will announce the approaching redemption], so that the redeemer who will come and mention to them this double p’kidah [remembrance] is the true redeemer.” Thus the language of the Rabbis on this Agadah.
Now you may ask: Why should they listen to Moses? Perhaps he heard this tradition as well as they did. In reply it may be said that thus they received the tradition from Joseph, who heard it from their father the prophet: the first person who will come and announce the message with this expression [pakod pakad’ti] will be the one who will deliver them [from Egypt], it being revealed and known before the Holy One, blessed be He, that no man will come and deceive them. This He promised them.
But in another place in the Midrash I found:²³⁷Ibid., 5:1. “Said Rabbi Chama the son of Rabbi Chanina: ‘When Moses was in his twelfth year, he was torn up from his father’s house. Why? Had he grown up in his father’s house, the children of Israel would not have believed in him when he came and told them these things.²³⁸The Hebrew is: hama’asim (the deeds). If this is the correct reading, it is obviously a reference not only to the words of the message, but also to all of the signs he did before the people. (See further, 4:1-9 and 30). However, from the concluding language of this Midrash quoted here further — kol had’varim (‘all’ the words) — it is clear that the sense here is also “words,” and reference is to the wording of the message of redemption: pakod pakad’ti. They would have said that his father handed him over these words, as Joseph had handed them over to Levi, and Levi to Kohath, and Kohath to Amram. This was why he was torn up from his father’s house, and when he came and told Israel all the words, they therefore believed him, as it is said, And the people believed.’”²³⁹Further, 4:31. The intent of the Rabbis’ words that Joseph handed it over to Levi [and as to why Jacob did not reveal it directly to Levi] is that Jacob revealed the secret to Joseph because of his love for him.²⁴⁰Genesis 37:3. And see Ramban there, Vol. I, pp. 451-2. With this very same language Joseph made all his brothers swear, and he revealed it to Levi.²⁴¹On the basis of Genesis 50:25, Ramban’s intent may be explained as follows: Joseph made all his brothers swear to bring his bones up from Egypt at the time of the redemption, and to Levi he revealed the secret of pakod pakad’ti, that with these words the true messenger will announce the approaching redemption. He told them that he gave this [as a secret to Levi] on account of the tradition he received from his father [not to reveal it], and he commanded that the matter remain a secret.²⁴²Hence when Moses came and said the words pakod pakad’ti, the elders of Israel who now knew of the tradition confirmed him as the true redeemer, for they knew that he could not have heard these words from his father as he was torn up from his father’s home when only twelve years old.

אלוקי העברים, seeing that we originated on the far side of the river Euphrates, we have to worship the gods who have their kingdom in that region.

ושמעו לקולך, in all that you will command them.

ושמעו לקולך, "they will listen to your voice, etc." G'd added the apparently superfluous word לקולך when the word לדבריך would have sufficed, in order to convince Moses that the people would believe him even if he did not reveal to them an additional name of G'd. The word קול implies something that is effective only for those who actually hear it. דברים are effective even if not heard directly. G'd wanted Moses to know that anyone who would hear Moses' voice, i.e. the good tidings he would convey, would believe him as there was no impediment such as a lack of faith standing in the people's way. Moses would not even have to perform miracles in order to gain the confidence of the Jewish people.

ויאמר, הראני נא את כבודך. “I said: please reveal to me Your glory.” Moses requested that G’d show him His true face in a vision, something our sages are in the habit of referring to as אספקרלריא המאירא, “a clear, unambiguous visual image.” G’d answered him that what He would do was to parade before him a number of phenomena, each of which represented some of the ways in which He demonstrated His earnest desire to be of benefit to His creatures; as a result of viewing these phenomena one after another, he, more than any other human being, would develop an appreciation of what G’d’s essence was all about; however, it was impossible to do more without terminating Moses’ life, as it was not given to mortals to get a still deeper insight into what an Eternal G’d, the Creator of the universe, was truly like.

Through Yaakov and Yoseif. You might ask: If so, Moshe also knew the expression, as they did. So how is [his using] it a proof? Perhaps Moshe was lying [that Hashem sent him]! The answer is: Moshe was only twelve [when he fled from Egypt], and this sign was transmitted only to adults.

נלכה נא דרך שלשת ימים במדבר; there was no intention of misleading Pharaoh and using this subterfuge whereas in effect Moses meant to flee Egypt with the people. The request aired by Moses here was aimed only at allowing the people to receive the commandments of the Torah during their brief vacation. G’d had wanted to introduce them to Torah legislation gradually, such as afterwards when He commanded them about most of the Sabbath legislation at Marah. (Mechilta, beginning of Parshat Beshalach).

V. 18. Du sollst nicht allein gehen, vor dem König nicht etwa als einzelner Enthusiast und Schwärmer erscheinen, er soll es sehen, dass du das ganze Volk hinter dir hast. — העבריִיִם. Es ist dies das erste Mal, dass im Namen des jüdischen Volkes als solches zu einem Dynasten gesprochen wird, und hier begegnen wir einer Form: עבריים, die nie wieder vorkommt. Es heißt sonst immer עברים. Möglich, dass hier der im עברי liegende Charakter ganz besonders und zwar als ein solcher betont wird, der nicht nur der Gesamtheit eigen wäre, sondern den jedes Glied der Gesamtheit vertritt. Wie Gott ein Mann genügte, der wie Awraham — nach ר׳ יהודה — den Mut hatte, die ganze Welt diesseits zu lassen und mit seinem Gott allein jenseits zu treten und darum עברי genannt wurde, so hat diesen Mut und diese Charakterstärke jeder einzelne seiner Söhne geerbt. Indem Mosche im Namen der "Iwrim" vor den König mit der Forderung hintreten soll, spricht er in diesem Namen aus: in jedem einzelnen von uns steht die Gesamtheit da, jeder einzelne von uns hat den Mut, die Aufgabe der Gesamtheit für sich allein einer ganzen Welt gegenüber zu vertreten und fortzutragen. (Während andere Nationen im Munde der Propheten häufig unter dem Bilde eines Tieres besprochen werden, tritt für Israel vorzugsweise das Bild eines Baumes ein. Ein Tierorganismus kann mit einem einzigen Fingerdruck oder Dolchstich getötet werden. Ein Baum wiederholt aber in jedem einzelnen Teile die Lebensfähigkeit des Ganzen. Schneidet man selbst die Wurzel ab, ein Ast, ein Zweig, ein Blatt, ein Auge oft genügt, um das vernichtete Pflanzenindividuum wieder herzustellen und seine Fortexistenz zu retten). Nicht עבריים ,עברים sind wir. Der Geist, der aus mir spricht, lebt auch in den Ältesten, lebt in jedem einzelnen des Volkes bis zum letzten Mann hinab. Unser Volk lässt sich nicht vernichten. In jedem einzelnen wiederholt sich der Geist, der Mut, die Entschiedenheit des Ganzen. Es ist nicht unmöglich, dass dieser Name deshalb hier in seiner ganzen Prägnanz hervorgehoben wird.

ושמעו לקולך, “they will listen (obey) to your voice.” According to Rashi, the Jews had already been given the code word with which their eventual redeemer would identify himself when both Yaakov and Joseph used the root word פקד in connection with the time of their redemption from slavery in Egypt. I explained this on Genesis 50,24 and 25. Some people raise the question that actually we have no record of Yaakov having said: פקוד יפקוד. According to my explanation on that verse the question has been answered satisfactorily.

ושמעו לקלן, “they will listen to you (and believe you).” Rashi explains that the reason that the people will immediately believe Moses was that they had a tradition going back to Yaakov according to which their eventual saviour would introduce himself by referring to G-d as having used the words: פקוד פקדתי אתכם, “I have surely remembered you.” Actually, Rashi is not correct, as that tradition only went back to Joseph having used these word in Genesis 50,25.

נקרה עלינו GOD HATH HAPPENED TO MEET US — The word נקרה signifies a casual meeting. Similar are: (Numbers 23:4) “And God happened to meet (ויקר) [Balaam]”; (Numbers 23:15) ואנכי אִקָּרָה כה which means “I will be met by him yonder”.

אלוקי העבריים, the G’d of those who follow the teachings of Ever. (grandson of Shem)

Elokim will surely consider you. This is puzzling: we do not find such a verse said by Yaakov. Perhaps the answer is: this verse is said twice by Yoseif (Bereishis 50:24, 25), thus Yoseif said one on his own accord, and one he said in the name of his father Yaakov, i.e., Yoseif received [this expression] from his father. (Re”m) So it is written in Pirkei D’Rabbi Eliezer (ch. 48), in Tosafos (Sotah 13a), and in Shemos Rabbah (here and in ch. 5). (Nachalas Yaakov).

ה׳ אלוקי העברים נקרה עלינו, "G'd, the Lord of the Hebrews has manifested Himself to us, etc." G'd revealed here that although He did not want that His four-lettered name be associated except with the Hebrews, and that this was the reason He had not revealed it except to the Hebrews, He wanted the Egyptians to know about this name so that when Moses would appear to Pharaoh citing that attribute of G'd, the latter could not claim that he had never heard of such a G'd. He was not familiar with that name because he had not qualified for familiarity with such an exalted name of G'd seeing he was a contemptible person.

קרה ,נקרה, ja auch קרא: treffen, seiner Grundbedeutung nach: rufen, weist immer, wie wir schon wiederholt bemerkt, auf etwas von außen auf uns Influierendes; es ist immer eine äußere Macht, die Gewalt auf uns übt, uns aus der von uns beabsichtigten oder erwarteten, "in die ihr beliebige Richtung ruft" weshalb ja auch das damit bezeichnete Zufällige nur subjektiv, nur von unserem Standpunkte aus, als zufällig, d.i. von uns nicht berechnet zu sein braucht, an sich aber gerade umsomehr ganz eigentliches Produkt göttlicher Providenz sein kann, die uns damit "in die von ihr beabsichtigte Richtung ruft." Hier in der Ansprache an einen heidnischen Fürsten finden wir den Ausdruck von Gott gebraucht, ganz so wie ihn später Bileam von seinen und Gottes gegenseitigen Beziehungen gebraucht: ואנכי אקרה כה ,אולי יקרה ד' לקראתי, und auch die Erzählung geht in diese Anschauung ein und adoptiert den Ausdruck: ויקר א׳ אל בלעם. Dewarim 23, 3. 4. 15) Bileam spricht: "ich will mich rufen lassen", d.h. ich) will mich einer außer mir liegenden Macht, "dem göttlichen Zuge" hingeben, dass er mich hinleite, ich weiß selbst noch nicht wohin; und einen ebenso seinen Gott zwingenden höheren Einfluss denkt er sich möglich, dass ein Höheres beide, ihn und seinen Gott, einander entgegenführe. Es ist dem Heidentum weder in seiner Beziehung zu seinem Gotte, noch seines Gottes zu ihm irgend ein wirklich freies, sich selbst aus sich selbst frei Bestimmendes. Im tiefen Grunde ist alles physische Notwendigkeit, wo jedes nur Macht hat über das andere, nicht aber über sich selbst. Ruht doch auf dieser Anschauung der ganze vorgebliche oder eingebildete Wahn des קוסם. Balak traut dem Bileam die Kunst zu, auf das Volk seines Hasses den Zorn der Götter herabbeschwören zu können. Bileam gibt die Möglichkeit zu und spricht: "Ich will mich meiner Selbständigkeit begeben und mich der Menschen und Götter zwingenden Macht hingeben, vielleicht werden dadurch auch die Götter gezwungen werden." Und Gott ging auf die Täuschung ein: ויקר א׳ וגו׳. Bileam glaubte schon, er habe die Götter gebannt, da ward er gezwungen, das gerade Gegenteil zu sprechen. Auch hier lässt Gott Mosche zuerst ganz in die Anschauung des Heidentums eingehen. אלקי העבריים נקרה עלינו. Unsere Gottheit, die nun seit drittehalb hundert Jahren nichts von sich hat hören lassen, ist jetzt ("durch eine über Götter wie Menschen waltende Nötigung, נקרה"), über uns sichtbar geworden. Das bedeutet etwas. Wir müssen ihr opfern, vielleicht ihren Zorn beschwichtigen. (Vergl. Kap. 5, 3 פן יפגענו בדבר וגו׳). Es kann niemand etwas dafür. Es ist eine höhere Fügung. — Die erste Forderung lautete gar nicht: שלח את עמי, sondern enthält nur einfach die Bitte, ein Opfer zu gestatten, und da dies in Mizrajim nicht möglich, so schließt die Bitte die Gewährung einer sechstägigen Entfernung in sich. Und alles ganz in Pharaos Sprache und Anschauung.

נקרה עלינו, “has appeared for our sake.” The construction is similar to Psalms 44,23: כי עליך הורגנו כל היום, “for we are being killed daily for Your sake.” Another example of a similar construction is found in Psalms 69,8: כי עליב נשאתי חרפה, “it is for Your sake that I have been reviled;”

God of the Hebrews. [הָעִבְרִיִּים is written with] an additional yud as an allusion to the ten plagues. (From an old Rashi manuscript.)

נקרה עלינו, at a time when we had not expected any divine prophecy, and had not asked anything of Him. He commanded us to bring offerings to satisfy His own will, not ours. [the author justifies the use of the root קרה which describes things which happen without one knowing the cause for these happenings. Ed.]

דרך שלשת ימים, “a distance of three days.” We must not accuse Moses of deliberately misleading Pharaoh in order for the Israelites to escape from his authority. Moses meant that in order to receive the commandments from G’d the people had to travel a distance of three days from the boundaries of Egypt. G’d had intended to introduce the commandments gradually, first the Sabbath legislation, such as happened later at Marah (Exodus 15,25 compare Mechilta 1 on 15,22). G’d had also introduced Avraham gradually to any demand He made upon him. He had not said: ”take your son Yitzchak and offer him as a sacrifice,” but had introduced the subject in stages saying 1) “your son;” 2) “your only one;” 3) “the one you love;” 4) “Yitzchak” (compare Genesis 22,2).

The word נקרה is derived from the term מקרה (happening). But in the beginning of Parshas Vayikra (1:1) Rashi wrote [that it means otherwise]: Hashem reveals Himself to prophets of the nations with a term [ ויקר , similar to נקרה ,] meaning impurity. Perhaps the answer is: ויקר [and נקרה ] is always derived from מקרה , but sometimes it means a chance happening, such as (Devarim 22:6): “ כי יקרא קן ציפור (if you happen upon a bird’s nest).” And sometimes it means emission of a man’s seed, which denotes impurity, such as in (ibid., 23:11) “ מקרה לילה (a happening of night).” (Re”m)

נקרה עלינו. "manifested Himself to us." G'd did not want Pharaoh to think that Moses was in regular communication with G'd day by day. It is also possible that the choice of the word נקרה, i.e. a chance encounter, was to forestall Pharaoh demanding to see that Moses and Aaron would receive communications from G'd on a regular basis.

דרך שלשת ימים, “a distance of three days’ walk.” This is also what the Israelites did, eventually; as it is written: Exodus 13,20: ויסעו מסכות, “they broke camp from having rested at Sukkot, (1) ויחנו ביום השני, they encamped again on the second day, איתם בקצה המדבר(2) ב, “at Eytam” on the third day at the edge of the desert. (3).

I [Bilaam] will be met by Him here ( ואנכי אקרה כה ). This אקרה does not imply that Bilaam happened to meet Hashem, since [on the contrary], Hashem met him, [as it states,] ויקר אלהים אל בלעם (“Hashem happened to meet Bilaam”). Bilaam was not the one initiating; rather he was the one being met. Rashi explains כה to mean הלום (“here”), as in (Shemos 7:16): “Until here ( כה ) you have not listened.” This כה does not mean “thusly”, as in (Shemos 4:22), “Thusly ( כה ) said Adonoy.” For if this כה means “thusly,” then אקרה could imply: “I thusly will be met by another, just as Hashem met me.” But this is not the intent of this verse. (Re”m)

ועתה נלכה נא, "and now let us go, etc." Moses used the word "now" to indicate that this request was an urgent one, requiring immediate action; G'd had not said that these sacrifices were to be offered on a specific date. It is also possible that Moses wanted to indicate to Pharaoh that as far as he was aware this march into the desert for three days in order to offer sacrifices there was a one time affair.

שלושת ימים. "Three days." Moses had to make it appear that the Israelites meant to go for only three days because G'd told him in verse 22 to tell the Israelites to borrow silver trinkets from the Egyptians. Unless the Egyptians would believe that the Jews planned to return they would not lend them the silver trinkets.

This explains also why G'd announced the matter of borrowing the silver trinkets already now, 12 months before the Israelites would actually "borrow" these trinkets. Had that instruction been issued only on the night of the Exodus (when the Torah mentions it as being carried out) it would have been difficult to carry out. We might have assumed that mentioning it at this juncture was merely to make the Israelites believe that the Exodus was really at hand. This is not correct, however. We believe that the reason we have proposed, i.e. that in order to make the eventual request for these trinkets plausible, the Egyptians first had to be under the impression that all the Jewish people really wanted was a three day religious holiday in the desert, away from Egyptian urban areas.

We still have to account for the fact that G'd instructed Moses to deceive Pharaoh by asking for a three day religious pilgrimage when in fact he did not mean for the people to return to Egypt at all? G'd appears to have tricked the Egyptians both regarding the nature of the Israelites' departure and regarding the nature of the "borrowings." Actually, everything G'd told Moses to say was perfectly just and fair. Firstly, inasmuch as the Israelites had performed many decades of slave labour for which the Egyptians had not paid any wages, they were entitled to recompense themselves, if only partially. Sanhedrin 91 records a disputation in front of Alexander the Great on that subject when the Egyptians demanded the return of these borrowed trinkets. The representative of the Jews at that time, a certain Gevihah ben Pesisah, succeeded in making the Egyptians withdraw their claim seeing that what the Jews had taken was so much less than what had been owed them at the time of the Exodus. Still, why did G'd have to resort to trickery? Surely G'd was capable of executing all His designs without having to resort to some form of deception!

We must assume therefore that the reason G'd deceived the Egyptians (on both counts) was in order to orchestrate the pursuit of the Jews by the Egyptian army and the crossing of the sea as well as the drowning of the Egyptian cavalry. Had the Egyptians not felt themselves deceived by the Israelites they would never have undertaken a chase. Compare what we have written on Exodus 14,5 that Pharaoh had a change of heart.

You will find a sign that we are on the right track when you read Shemot Rabbah 14,3 that during the plague of darkness the Jews who were not affected by this discovered the secret hiding places of the Egyptians so that at the time of the Exodus they could prove that the Egyptians lied when they claimed not to possess the items the Jews wanted to borrow. The question is, of course, why, if G'd already enabled the Jews to discover these trinkets, why did He not allow them to help themselves at once? It was only a few days prior to the Exodus! No doubt G'd wanted that the Egyptians should remain under the impression that the Jews were only borrowing these trinkets so that once they realised they had been deceived they would feel morally entitled to pursue the Jews and to retrieve these items.

Now let us look at the legality of the matter. If the Jews had helped themselves to what they discovered in the homes of the Egyptians during the days of darkness they would have been perfectly in order. When a person is forcibly deprived of his possessions there is no law which prevents him to take back what was his. Jacob used subterfuge to compensate himself for what Laban had tricked him out of. The Talmud tells of an occurrence involving three great sages in Yuma 83. When two of them were swindled out of money they had deposited with the innkeeper, they resorted to deception in order to retrieve what was rightfully theirs. Not only did their action not involve a forbidden practice but they did what David refers to in Psalms 18,27 as a practice employed by G'd Who engages in being wily with those who have been devious themselves.

In our situation the matter is even more clear-cut. If you examine the text, you will find that Moses (at G'd's behest) did not utter a single lie. He never mentioned a word about the Israelites ever returning to Egypt. Furthermore, Moses was careful that the deceptive words could not be attributed to G'd himself but only to the Israelites, if at all. The words starting with: "and now we want to go," were to be spoken by Moses, Aaron and the elders. They were not part of what G'd had said. If the Torah had not inserted the word ועתה, we would indeed have assumed that they said, quoting G'd: "Now let us go three days travel into the desert, etc." In chapter 5, verse 1 we do indeed find that Moses quoted G'd saying: "send My people off so that they can celebrate for Me in the desert." He did not mention any time frame at that time. It was only the Israelites who added (in 5,3) "let us go for three days into the desert, etc." While it is true that at that point the Israelites did not say ועתה, they simply assumed that the word ועתה Moses had mentioned in 3,18, was sufficiently clear. The fact that even the Jews had not lied to the Egyptians is proven by history. The Jews who left Egypt celebrated only in the desert seeing that the whole generation died before they came to the land of Canaan. While it is true that many of the children of that generation entered the Holy Land and celebrated there also, it was not the minors who had negotiated with Pharaoh about their release from bondage. People under twenty years of age were under no obligation to offer sacrifices to G'd. The Israelites also did not lie when they asked for the silver trinkets as the Torah says: "they asked for, etc." Initially, they borrowed these trinkets. When the Egyptians did not pay them the wages owed, they kept the trinkets as partial payment. They planned to present the Egyptians wih a bill for the balance at a future date.

One problem has bothered me for a long time; why did G'd not simply drown the Egyptians who deserved drowning by letting the river Nile spill over? This would have been the appropriate punishment for the people who had drowned the Jewish babies in the Nile. Why did G'd wait till the Egyptians had pursued the Jewish people and He had to perform a major miracle by splitting the sea and allowing the Jews to cross on dry land? Also, why the devious method of the Jews borrowing the silver instead of their helping themselves to it during the days of darkness? After all, according to the interpretation of the Midrash the meaning of Exodus 11,23 that the Jews "had light in their dwellings" is that they had light "even in the Egyptians' dwellings?" Perhaps G'd was motivated by two considerations. 1) The splitting of the sea and everything connected with it aggrandised His name amongst mankind in a way that could not have been achieved by any other means. 2) G'd applies the yardstick of "measure for measure." Sotah 11 states that the Egyptians had cleverly inveigled the Israelites into slave labour by sweet-talking them into such patriotic service, whereas gradually they became more and more cruel and demanding. G'd orchestrated the steps leading to redemption in a similar fashion. First He had Moses speak about a three day religious holiday for Pharaoh's labourers as well as borrowings of the Egyptians' silver and of their fancy garments. G'd gradually upped the ante, just as the Egyptians had done in their treatment of the Jews. At the same time G'd was still careful so that even the Jews themselves did not utter a lie. The prophet Micha was quite correct (Micha 7,20) when he characterised one of the greatest Jewish virtues with the words: "You give truth to Jacob."