Komentarz do Wyjścia 1:17

ותחיין את הילדים This may mean THEY MAINTAINED THE CHILDREN IN LIFE — they provided them with food (Sotah 11b). The Targum renders ותחיין the first time it occurs (i. e. in this verse) by וקימא (which means, “and they — the women — preserved the babes”). and the second time (Exodus 1:18) by וקימתן (which means, “and ye women have preserved etc.”) The Targum is able to distinguish between the two meanings of this word, but this cannot be done in Hebrew because in the Hebrew language in the case of fem. plur. this word and similar forms (ending in נָה or ןָ) are used in the sense of “they did something” (3rd person) and in the sense of “ye did something” (2nd person). For example: (Exodus 2:19) “And they (the daughters of Jethro) said, (וַתֹּאמַרְןָ) “An Egyptian man etc.”, which is the past tense (the Rashi text must read here לשון עָבַר) (imperf. with Vau conv.), just as one would use וַיֹאמְרוּ if one were speaking of men; (Jeremiah 54:25) “Ye women have spoken (ותדברנה) with your mouths”, having the same meaning as דברתן, and corresponding to ותדברו when used of men; (Ezekiel 13:19) “And ye (women) have profaned Me (ותחללנה) among My people” which is a past tense, the same as חללתן corresponding to ותחללו when used of men.

ותיראנה, meaning “they feared, revered.” If the word had been spelled without the letter י it would be a derivative of ראה, to see. It appears in that mode in Exodus 2,6.

ותיראן המילדות את האלוקים, The midwives were G'd-fearing, etc." Why did the Torah repeat that: 1) "they did not do what the king had told them to do," 2) "they kept the children alive?" According to Sotah 11 they supplied food and water for these boy babies. If so, why had they not been doing this before the king's decree came into effect? Perhaps all the Torah wanted to tell us is that they did not stop to provide these services at their own expense. The Torah therefore would describe the level of the midwives' fear of G'd. They did what they could to keep these babies alive; they most certainly did not kill the babies.

They provided water and food for them. When it says “And did not do as the Egyptian king had told them,” we infer that the midwives did not kill them. So what does “they kept the infant boys alive” teach? That “they provided water and food. . .”

V. 17. ותחייץ, sie taten nicht nur nicht, was der König sie geheißen, sondern taten alles Mögliche, die Kinder am Leben zu erhalten. Alles, was der König versuchte, schlug ins Gegenteil um. Fortan mussten ja die Hebammen als rechtschaffene Frauen alles Mögliche tun, mit aller ihrer Kunst arbeiten, auf ihren Knien Gott anflehen, dass jetzt kein totes Kind zur Welt käme, kein Kind zur Welt käme, das irgend einen Schaden habe, damit man sie nicht verdächtige, sie hätten auf des Königs Befehl irgend etwas getan oder unterlassen, und dadurch sei das Kind gefährdet worden.

ותחיין, there is no difference in meaning if the form of the past tense as a future with the letter ו in front is used or if the Torah had used a regular past tense such as והחיו את הילדים.

This word וַתְּחַיֶיo and any form thereof is used to mean: “they” (fem.) did something, as well as: “you” (fem. pl.) did something. In other words, there is no difference [in spelling or nikud] between the third person plural feminine and the second person plural feminine, in the future tense [which here is switched to the past by the ו ]. (Re”m) It seems that Rashi offers the above explanation because he is answering the question: Since we explained the first “ וַתְּחַיֶיo (they kept. . . alive)” as providing water and food, the Targum is difficult to understand. It translated the first “ וַתְּחַיֶיo as וְקַיָימָא (they kept alive),” yet the second (v. 18) as וְקַיֵימְתּוּן . Why the switch? Otherwise we could have said that וְקַיֵימְתּוּן means they provided water and food, and for this reason the translation differs. But according to our explanation that the first וַתְּחַיֶיo means providing water and food, why did the Targum translate it as וְקַיָימָא ? Therefore Rashi explains: “This is because, in Hebrew. . .” [Therefore the Targum translated the verbs according to their relative subjects].

It is also possible that as long as everything was normal they never even thought about providing food and water for the babies. Once Pharaoh had decreed that the boy babies should be killed, the midwives feared that if by chance one of those children should die they would be blamed for the death. They now began to provide food and water for these babies in order to deflect such suspicions. Perhaps this is the reason for the word את when the Torah describes the midwives as G'd-fearing. They also wanted to be seen as G'd-fearing in the eyes of man.

You [women] have spoken, וַתְּדַבֵּרְנָה , is the same as דִבַּרְתֶּן . Just as we find וַתּאמַרְנָה (third person, plural feminine) in one place, and וַתְּדַבֵּרְנָה in another, and this [second] word is like וַתּאמַרְנָה , with the same conjugation — yet it means the same as דִבַּרְתֶּן , which is second person. Here as well, the first וַתְּחַיֶיo is third person, while the second וַתְּחַיֶין is second person, although they has the same conjugation.

כאשר דבר, as he had said. The letter כ which precedes the word אשר is a Kaf hadimyon describing a comparison, a similarity. The Torah tells us that not only did the midwives not do what the king had ordered them to do, but that they did not even do anything similar to what the king had demanded of them. The Torah could also be telling us something about the general fate of Royal decrees. Normally, when a powerful king issues a decree it is observed by his subjects due to fear. As people notice that not every violation is followed by severe penalties, more and more people begin to ignore irksome decrees. In this instance the Torah tells us that the decree was not even observed when it was still new. The midwives לא עשו, never carried out, כאשר דבר, as soon as he had said it. The word כאשר may be understood as "as soon as," just as in Genesis 27,30: "as soon as Isaac finished speaking."